2018-Ģ��ƵAT-885

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵDT erroneously awarded the Appellant moral damages because she did not produce any corroborating evidence to support the contention that harm had occurred. However, Ģ��ƵAT held that the award for moral damages would stand since the Secretary-General had not appealed the Ģ��ƵDT judgment. Ģ��ƵAT held that there is no corroborating evidence to support the Appellant��s claim for damages to ��restore her professional, physical and emotional suffering�� and for ��irregularities and ignorance. �� The appeal could not succeed on those claims. Ģ��ƵAT also held that a referral for accountability is not appropriate, at least at this stage.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant challenged the decision of OIAI to close the investigation into complaints of harassment, discrimination, and abuse of authority against other staff members. Ģ��ƵDT held that OIAI failed to apply the required reasonable level of care when reviewing and handling the Applicant��s complaints. Ģ��ƵDT rescinded the decisions of the Chief of Investigations (COI) of 12 and 14 April 2016 and remanded the Applicant��s complaints of 26 January and 21 March 2016 to the Director, OIAI, Ģ��ƵICEF. Ģ��ƵDT ordered that the re-examination be completed within 60 days of the issuance of the judgment and that the COI and Investigation Specialist who had previously handled her complaints be recused from dealing with her case. Moreover, Ģ��ƵDT awarded the Applicant moral damages for her ��mental stress and anxiety. ��

Legal Principle(s)

There is no legal basis on which compensation can be awarded for a claim when the individual has not produced any supporting evidence.

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