2021-Ģ��ƵAT-1175

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

As a preliminary matter, Ģ��ƵAT denied the Appellant��s request for an oral hearing. Ģ��ƵAT held that the Appellant failed to discharge his burden of showing that the Ģ��ƵDT Judgment was defective or identifying grounds for appeal. In addition, Ģ��ƵAT held there was no basis for vacating the Ģ��ƵDT Judgment. Ģ��ƵAT held that the Appellant did not specifically contest the Ģ��ƵDT��s findings on receivability and that receivability was not therefore an issue before it. Ģ��ƵAT held that even if receivability was an issue before it, there was nothing provided by the Appellant to suggest that Ģ��ƵDT erred in its findings on receivability. Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵDT did not err by finding that the Appellant had not discharged his burden to demonstrate that his non-selection was tainted by improper motive, bias, or abuse of authority. Noting that the Appellant was given the opportunity to participate in a corrected selection process, Ģ��ƵAT held that, by failing to participate in the necessary recruitment procedures without reasonable excuse, the Appellant was estopped from contesting the procedures and the selection outcome. Ģ��ƵAT held that, given Ģ��ƵDT did not make any errors of law or fact in its Judgment, Ģ��ƵAT was precluded from awarding the remedies requested by the Appellant, including any award for costs. Ģ��ƵAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the Ģ��ƵDT Judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Appellant contested the decision to separate him from service upon the abolishment of his post and his non-selection for the post of Fundraising Officer. Ģ��ƵDT dismissed his application.

Legal Principle(s)

It is not sufficient in an appeal for an appellant simply to set out how they disagree with the Ģ��ƵDT outcome or attempt to have the matter retried. The burden of proving improper motives, such as abuse of authority, discrimination, retaliation, or harassment, rests with the person making the allegation. The purpose of management evaluation is to afford the Administration the opportunity to correct any errors in an administrative decision so that judicial review of the administrative decision is not necessary. By failing to participate in a corrected recruitment procedure without reasonable excuse, an appellant may be estopped from contesting the procedures and the selection outcome. Compensation cannot be awarded when no illegality has been established; it cannot be granted when there is no breach of the staff member��s rights or administrative wrongdoing in need of repair.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on merits

Outcome Extra Text

N/A

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

Bhaskar Palit

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement