2020-Ģ��ƵAT-1015

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Ģ��ƵAT held that there was no express rescission of the impugned decision by the Administration. Ģ��ƵAT held that monthly renewals pending the outcome of the rebuttal of a performance evaluation did not resolve the complaint of the non-renewal of the fixed-term appointment. Ģ��ƵAT held that the monthly renewals did not rescind or supersede the impugned decision and the application could not be considered moot. Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵDT erred in its decision, resulting in a manifestly unreasonable decision. Ģ��ƵAT upheld the appeal, vacated the Ģ��ƵDT judgment, and remanded the matter to Ģ��ƵDT for proper determination.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

bicThe staff member contested the Administration��s decision not to renew his fixed-term appointment. However, before the management evaluation could be completed, the staff member��s appointment was renewed on a month-to-month basis. Ģ��ƵDT determined that the staff member��s application was moot because the subsequent monthly renewals effectively rescinded and superseded the impugned decision.

Legal Principle(s)

In order to conduct a judicial review, there is an obligation on the Secretary-General to provide reasons for an administrative decision.

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

Handy

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement