2010-UNAT-088, Megerditchian
UNAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. UNAT held that UNDT was correct to find that it was not competent to consider the application as far as it concerned the decision not to award Ms Megerditchian a service contract since such contracts were awarded to non-staff members. However, UNAT held that UNDT erred in receiving the application in respect of a service contract. UNAT held that UNDT erred in its interpretation of the term priority consideration and that a promise of priority consideration in a job application did not by itself give rise to a legal right on the part of Ms Megerditchian. UNAT held that UNDT erred in finding that the Administration caused harm to Ms Megerditchian. UNAT allowed the appeal, rescinded the UNDT judgment and vacated the award of damages.
Ms Megerditchian contested the non-renewal of her service contract. UNDT found partly for Ms Megerditchian and awarded compensation.
Priority consideration cannot be interpreted as a promise or guarantee to be appointed or to receive that for which one is considered in priority.