2021-Ģ��ƵAT-1164

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Ģ��ƵAT considered an appeal by Mr. Rugerinyange. Ģ��ƵAT noted that Mr. Rugerinyange sought to challenge an administrative decision directly affecting the terms of his new contract as an individual contractor. Therefore, even if the administrative decision of placing him on administrative leave with pay referred to facts which had occurred while he was still a staff member, as he claimed, it affected the new contract and his new capacity as an independent contractor. As such, he had no legal standing before the Ģ��ƵDT. Accordingly, Ģ��ƵAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the Ģ��ƵDT Order.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

In Order No. 198 (NBI/2020), the Ģ��ƵDT dismissed Mr. Rugerinyange��s application for suspension of action pending management evaluation against the Secretary-General��s decision to place him on administrative leave with pay during an investigation for possible misconduct. While the Ģ��ƵDT acknowledged that Mr. Rugerinyange had previously been a staff member, the Ģ��ƵDT found that the provisions of Article 3(1)(b) of the Ģ��ƵDT Statute did not apply to the present case, since the issue under consideration did not derive from possible violations of his terms of appointment, but rather from the Secretary-General��s decision to place him on administrative leave with pay when his status was no longer that of a staff member, but rather that of an individual contractor. The Ģ��ƵDT held that Mr. Rugerinyange��s application for suspension of action was not receivable ratione personae and dismissed it in its entirety.

Legal Principle(s)

Individual contractors do not have standing before the Ģ��ƵDT. A former staff member has standing before the Ģ��ƵDT only with respect to administrative decisions that affect his or her terms of appointment of his or her former appointment.

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

Nshuti Rugerinyange

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement