2010-UNAT-049, Planas
UNAT held that an introductory argument concerning the content of the other party's observations or aspects of administrative conduct that was not raised at the first instance is largely inadmissible. UNAT held that UNDT was correct in finding that, as the Appellant did not contest in precise terms her non-selection for any post, she did not identify any administrative decision in her application. UNAT noted that the Appellant had at no time requested management evaluation, or sought administrative review as required under the former internal justice system. UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the UNDT judgment.
The Applicant contested the alleged non-application of paragraph 48(a) of the UNHCR Procedural Guidelines for Appointments, Postings and Promotions (Procedural Guidelines), which establishes the rotation eligibility requirements for appointments, postings and promotions in duty stations grouped into three categories, H/A, B/C and D/E. UNDT dismissed the application in a summary judgment, holding that the Applicant had not contested any administrative decision.
The appeal is not the appropriate occasion to reply to the dispute in the first instance or to introduce new elements for consideration that were not put forward at the UNDT level.