2019-Ģ��ƵAT-911

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵRWA DT committed an error of fact in stating that the OPT Allowance was paid in local currency, which led Ģ��ƵRWA DT to commit an error of law in stating that Area Staff Circular No. A/04/2014 was applicable. Ģ��ƵAT held that Area Staff Circular No. A/04/2014 was only applicable to the Jerusalem Allowance and not the OPT Allowance, which was paid in US Dollars. Ģ��ƵAT held that such an error of law would be inconsequential if its second line of reasoning, that no rule or policy requires the CAF be applied to the OPT Allowance, was correct. Ģ��ƵAT held that there was no rule requiring the application of the CAF to the OPT Allowance. However, Ģ��ƵAT held that the Ģ��ƵRWA Commissioner-General was not prevented from applying the CAF and it lay in his discretion as to whether to apply the CAF to allowances. Noting that the Commissioner-General applied the CAF to several other allowances, Ģ��ƵAT held that without knowing an articulated reason for the Commissioner-General��s decision it was unable to assess whether such a decision was arbitrary, capricious, or unlawful. Ģ��ƵAT remanded the case to Ģ��ƵRWA DT to review the Commissioner-General��s reasons for the decision not to apply the CAF to the OPT Allowance and determine whether his decision constituted a lawful exercise of his discretion.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision not to subject the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) Allowance to the Currency Adjustment Factor (CAF), an artificial exchange rate which is applied to protect the amount received in local currency by staff members while converting their salaries from US Dollars or Jordanian Dinars. Ģ��ƵRWA DT dismissed the application on the ground that the Applicant had failed to establish any rule or policy requiring that the CAF must be applied to the OPT allowance.

Legal Principle(s)

A decision of the Administration may be impugned if it is found to be arbitrary or capricious, motivated by prejudice or extraneous factors, or was flawed by procedural irregularity or error of law. Stated reasons for an administrative decision are essential for Ģ��ƵAT to exercise its judicial review of the decision. When a justification is given by the Administration for the exercise of its discretion, it must be supported by the facts.

Outcome

Appeal granted

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

El-Arqan

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement