2010-UNAT-062, Bertucci
The Secretary-General filed appeals against UNDT Orders. UNAT determined that, generally, only appeals against final judgments are receivable. UNAT noted that an interlocutory appeal is receivable exceptionally in cases where UNDT has clearly exceeded its jurisdiction or competence. UNAT held that it would not interfere lightly with the broad discretion of UNDT in the management of cases. Further, UNAT noted that one of the goals of the new system of administration of justice is rendering timely judgments; cases before UNDT could seldom proceed if either party were able to appeal interlocutory decisions. UNAT held that in this case, it saw no reason to depart from the general rule that only appeals against final judgments are receivable. UNAT dismissed the Secretary-General’s interlocutory appeals as not receivable.
The staff member contested his non-selection for the post of ASG/DESA. Before and during the hearing of the case, UNDT issued a series of Orders (i. e. Order Nos. 40, 42, 43, 44 and 46 (NY/2010)).
UNAT generally has no jurisdiction to receive interlocutory appeals (i. e. appeals against rulings made during the course of trial before a final judgment is rendered). Interlocutory appeals are only receivable where UNDT has clearly exceeded its jurisdiction or competence.