2012-UNAT-207

2012-UNAT-207, Hallal

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

UNAT considered an appeal, in which the Appellant claimed that UNDT committed procedural errors in allowing the Secretary-General to embark on a de novo fact-finding inquiry and that the disciplinary measure of separation was disproportionate. UNAT held that it was within the competence of UNDT to hold oral hearings as well as to order the production of evidence for fair and expeditious disposal of the proceedings. UNAT held that the Administration bears the burden of establishing that the alleged misconduct, for which a disciplinary measure has been taken against a staff member, occurred and that this burden was met through the evidence considered by UNDT. UNAT held that the Appellant’s assertion that his statements were more credible than the evidence given by a United Nations Volunteer were unfounded. UNAT found that he was merely repeating arguments already thoroughly considered and rejected by UNDT. UNAT held that the Appellant did not identify any mitigating factors that demonstrated that the summary dismissal was disproportionate to the offence. UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the UNDT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision to separate him from service without notice to the former �山��Administrative Tribunal. UNDT rejected the Applicant’s claims that the disciplinary measure was not proportionate to the misconduct and that his due process rights were not respected. UNDT dismissed the application.

Legal Principle(s)

In exercising judicial review in disciplinary cases, UNDT must examine: (1) whether the facts on which the disciplinary measure was based have been established; (2) whether the established facts legally amount to misconduct under the Staff Regulations and Rules; and (3) whether the disciplinary measure applied was disproportionate to the offence. In a system of administration of justice governed by law, the presumption of innocence must be respected. In disciplinary matters, the Administration bears the burden of establishing that the alleged misconduct for which a disciplinary measure has been taken against a staff member occurred.

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.

Full Judgment

Applicants/ Appellants

Hallal

Entity

UNICEF

Case Number(s)

2011-212

Tribunal

UNAT

Registry Location :

New York