Ãå±±½ûµØ

2010-UNAT-056

2010-UNAT-056, Shakir

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

UNAT concurred with UNDT that the case was time-barred and not receivable. UNAT noted that, while the Appellant referred to an accident that prevented her from filing on time, she did not mention this to UNDT and raised it for the first time before UNAT. UNAT held that, while Article 2. 5 of the UNAT Statute allows it to admit further evidence in exceptional circumstances, it would not admit evidence that was known to the party and could have been presented to UNDT. UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the UNDT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

UNDT judgment: The Applicant contested the non-renewal of her appointment. UNDT held that her application was time-barred and rejected it. UNDT found no exceptional circumstances within the meaning of former Staff Rule 111. 2(f) that would justify a waiver of the time limit.

Legal Principle(s)

UNAT will not admit additional evidence that was known to the party and could have, with due diligence, been presented to UNDT.

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 UNDT Statute and Article 11(3) of the UNAT 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
Shakir
Entity
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry Location :
Date of Judgment
Judge(s)
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type