Ãå±±½ûµØ

2011-UNAT-178

2011-UNAT-178, Hepworth

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

UNAT held that the Appellant was not given an opportunity to call witnesses at trial and prior to that was not able to discuss with his supervisor the reason for his transfer. UNAT held that the appeal was receivable because UNDT had committed an error in procedure, such as to affect the decision of the case when it limited the evidence. UNAT held that due process required that a staff member must know the reasons for a decision so that he or she can act on it and the complainant was left in an unfair position in terms of attempts to resolve the dispute when deprived of the opportunity to consider the reasons for his lateral transfer. UNAT allowed the appeal and remanded the case to UNDT for a determination of the facts and the merits of the application.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision not to renew his fixed-term appointment. UNDT rejected his application.

Legal Principle(s)

The burden of proving improper motivation lies with the staff member contesting the decision not to renew his or her contract. The burden of proving that the first instance judge erred on a question of fact resulting in a manifestly unreasonable decision lies with the appellant. Due process requires that a staff member must know the reasons for a decision so that he or she can act on it.

Outcome
Appeal granted

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
Hepworth
Entity
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry Location :
Date of Judgment
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type