Ãå±±½ûµØ

2012-UNAT-206

2012-UNAT-206, Liverakos

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

UNAT considered the Appellant’s appeal. UNAT noted that, contrary to the Appellant’s contention, UNDT was not required to ascertain whether the closure of the Centre was a consequence of mismanagement or of any other factor since the primary purpose was not to get rid of the Appellant. UNAT found that UNDT did not fail to exercise its jurisdiction by not ascertaining whether the closure of the Centre was the result of serious mismanagement and irregularities. UNAT also found that the Appellant failed to submit sufficiently clear and convincing evidence that the desire to retaliate against him was a key factor in the decision not to renew his appointment. UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the UNDT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision not to renew his appointment, which had expired. UNDT found that the reason given by the Administration for the non-renewal of the Applicant’s appointment, the namely imminent closure of the Centre, was borne out by documents, and was not retaliatory, contrary to the Applicant’s contentions. UNDT dismissed the application.

Legal Principle(s)

Fixed-term appointments, including temporary appointments, do not carry with them expectations of renewal. The Secretary-General has the discretionary power not to renew an appointment, so long as there are legal grounds for their decision.

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