2019-Ģ��ƵAT-949

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Ģ��ƵAT held that it was not satisfied that the essential elements were present to enable Ģ��ƵAT to exercise its jurisdiction within the meaning of Article 2(10) of the Ģ��ƵAT Statute in regard to the decision of IMO SAB. Ģ��ƵAT held that in this case, even if the SAB issued decision, it was nevertheless only advisory or recommendatory. Ģ��ƵAT noted that the SAB gave advice to the Secretary-General of IMO, who could not be regarded as a neutral part of the process as he is both the employer��s representative and the original decision-maker. Ģ��ƵAT held that it was the Secretary-General of IMO, who was not a neutral first instance, who took the final decision. Ģ��ƵAT remanded the matter of the appeal to the IMO SAB under Article 2(10) of the Ģ��ƵAT Statute for reconsideration and decision, noting that the Respondent must comply with its due process obligations.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The staff member contested the decision of the Secretary-General of IMO not to reclassify his post, a decision taken upon the recommendation of the Classification Committee and the subsequent recommendation from the Staff Appeals Board (SAB).

Legal Principle(s)

Ģ��ƵAT is competent to hear appeals from an international organisation or other entities participating in the common system of conditions of service where a special agreement has been concluded which accepts the jurisdiction of Ģ��ƵAT; however, such a special agreement may only be concluded where the organisation or entity utilises a neutral first instance process that includes a written record and written decision providing reasons, fact and law.

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

Sheffer

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement