2018-Ģ��ƵAT-882

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

The Appellant sought an order for reinstatement, an increase in the compensation awarded, and an increase in the amount awarded by Ģ��ƵDT for moral damages. The Appellant also contested the failure Ģ��ƵDT��s failure to make a referral for accountability to the Secretary-General under Article 10(8) of the Ģ��ƵDT Statute. Ģ��ƵAT decided that Article 10(5)(a) of the Ģ��ƵDT Statute, which corresponds to Article 9 (1)(a) of the Ģ��ƵAT Statute, does not confer on the Tribunal the power to enforce the reinstatement of a staff member��s contract in a non-renewal case. Ģ��ƵAT, therefore, held that the Appellant��s claim for an order of reinstatement must be rejected. Ģ��ƵAT held that a staff member��s testimony alone is not sufficient to present evidence supporting harm under Article 10(5)(b) of the Ģ��ƵDT Statute. Therefore, the testimony of an applicant in such circumstances needs the corroboration of independent evidence to support the contention that harm has occurred. Ģ��ƵAT accordingly dismissed those claims but allowed Ģ��ƵDT��s award of moral damages to stand since it was not appealed by the Secretary-General. Ģ��ƵAT further held that referral for accountability is not appropriate in this case, as Cohen held that the exercise of the power of referral for accountability must be exercised sparingly and only where the breach or conduct in question exhibits serious flaws. Ģ��ƵAT found that the Appellant did not establish any error of law, fact, or procedure that would entitle Ģ��ƵAT to interfere with Ģ��ƵDT��s judgment. Ģ��ƵAT held that the appeal must fail.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the non-renewal of her contract and the amount of damages awarded by Ģ��ƵDT. Ģ��ƵDT found that the new reason for the non-renewal of the Applicant��s contract, which was provided ex post facto, was not supported by any evidence. Ģ��ƵDT, therefore, concluded that the Applicant��s non-renewal was unlawful. Ģ��ƵDT ordered recission of the decision not to renew the Applicant��s fixed-term appointment beyond 31 December 2015 and, in the alternative, compensation in the amount of one-year net base salary. Ģ��ƵDT also awarded moral damages to the Applicant.

Legal Principle(s)

The power of referral for accountability must be exercised sparingly and only where the breach or conduct in question exhibits serious flaws. The Ģ��ƵDT and Ģ��ƵAT Statutes do not confer the power to enforce the reinstatement of a staff member in a non-renewal case. A staff member��s testimony alone is not sufficient to present evidence supporting harm under Article 10(5)(b) of the Ģ��ƵDT Statute.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on merits

OAJ prepared this case law summary for informational purposes only. It is no official record and should not be relied upon as an authoritative interpretation of the Tribunals' rulings. For the authoritative texts, please refer to the judgment or order rendered by the respective Tribunal. The Tribunals are the only bodies competent to interpret their respective judgments, as provided under Article 12(3) of the Ģ��ƵDT Statute and Article 11(3) of the Ģ��ƵAT Statute. Any inaccuracies in the publication are the sole responsibility of OAJ, which should be contacted directly for any correction requests. To provide comments, don't hesitate to get in touch with OAJ at oaj@un.org.

The judgment summaries were generally prepared in English. They were translated into French and are being reviewed for accuracy of the translation.

Applicants/Appellants

Rehman

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement