2023-Ģ��ƵAT-1379

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

The Ģ��ƵAT considered three appeals by the applicant.

The Ģ��ƵAT found that the impugned Order was an interlocutory order and was obviously beyond the competence of the Ģ��ƵAT.

The Ģ��ƵAT held that the applicant had not submitted documents to prove being a United Nations staff member and that he had no legal standing before the Ģ��ƵDT. The Ģ��ƵAT noted that there was no evidence of an offer of appointment having been issued to him for either post. Second, he failed to complete the pre-recruitment formalities for both posts. Third, he failed to confirm, within a reasonable time, his interest and availability for the consultancy. Lastly, consultants are not staff members of the United Nations.

The Ģ��ƵAT was of the view that the applicant has deliberately flouted Ģ��ƵAT orders, filed exceedingly extensive, gratuitously insulting and irrelevant documents constituting scurrilous personal attacks on numerous officials of the United Nations, and submitted potentially defamatory comments against the Judges of the Ģ��ƵDT and the Ģ��ƵAT and the Registrar. The Ģ��ƵAT found that his activity constituted an abuse of the CCMS and abuse of process.

The Ģ��ƵAT dismissed the appeals and affirmed Judgment Nos. Ģ��ƵDT/2022/078 and Ģ��ƵDT/2023/073; instructed the applicant to refrain from using the CCMS and the United Nations internal justice system and refrain from all outside communication with the Judges and Registries of the Tribunals; and instructed the Registrar to disregard all correspondence from him.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

An individual sought to become a staff member but was unable to identify an administrative decision to contest. In Order No. 074 (NY/2022) on case management, the Ģ��ƵDT requested that the applicant provide information on the administrative decision he intended to contest and on his employment status as a United Nations staff member. After he failed to do so, in Judgment No. Ģ��ƵDT/2022/078 in the same case, the Ģ��ƵDT dismissed his application as not receivable.

Subsequently, the applicant sought to be recognized as a former staff member of ECA and a current staff member of DOS. In Judgment No. Ģ��ƵDT/2023/073, the Ģ��ƵDT dismissed his application as not receivable.

Legal Principle(s)

The Ģ��ƵDT��s competence is limited to cases brought by staff members, former staff members or persons making claims in the name of incapacitated or deceased staff members of the United Nations.

Procedural rights are created when an offer of employment is issued, the conditions of the offer of employment have been fulfilled and the offer of employment has been accepted unconditionally. When a decision to appoint has not been finalized because it is still subject to other internal processes, the applicant may not be considered a staff member.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on merits; Appeal dismissed on receivability

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

Leopold Camille Yodjeu Ntemde

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry