2020-Ģ��ƵAT-1037

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵDT��s language, which was strongly critical of the Appellant, was unwarranted. Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵDT did not err in finding that the decision to discontinue the payment of her SPA was a legitimate exercise of the Administration��s discretion, as the Appellant no longer met the requirements for it. Ģ��ƵAT held that the discontinuation of the SPA was justified in view of the Administration��s obligation and right to correct such an erroneous situation. Ģ��ƵAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the Ģ��ƵDT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the Administration��s decision to discontinue her Special Post Allowance (SPA), which had been paid in recognition of her performance at a higher level for approximately 6 years. Ģ��ƵDT found that the functions of team leader and/or delegated certifying officer did not represent the full functions of a P-2 level post but fell within the functions of the Applicant��s G-7 post. Ģ��ƵDT held that the objective of the classification exercise recommended by the Management Evaluation Unit was not to place the Applicant at a higher-level post but to determine whether the duties and responsibilities assigned to her were commensurate to the staff member��s post, which it did so determine. Ģ��ƵDT dismissed the case.

Legal Principle(s)

Special Post Allowance (SPA) is of a discretionary, temporary and exceptional nature.

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

Yabowork

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement