2010-UNAT-063, Costa
UNAT referenced the Shanks jurisprudence (judgment No. 2010-UNAT-026bis) where it held that the authority of a final judgment - res judicata - cannot be so readily set aside. UNAT noted that there are only limited grounds as enumerated in Article 11 of the UNAT Statute for review of a final judgment and an allegation of an error in law is not one of them. UNAT dismissed the application to set aside and remand the previous judgment.
Previous judgment: The Applicant filed an application to set aside a previous judgment, holding that her case was time-barred, and have the case remanded to UNDT. She claimed that this error could lead to a miscarriage of justice. The Secretary-General submitted that there were no grounds for UNAT to review the application and requested its dismissal.
The authority of a final judgment - res judicata - cannot be so readily set aside. There are only limited grounds as enumerated in Article 11 of the UNAT Statute for review of a final judgment. An allegation of an error in law is not one of them.