2012-UNAT-210, Finniss
UNAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. Noting the absence of a written record, UNAT held that it could not confirm if the procedure under Article 17 (Oral Evidence) of the UNDT RoP was complied with, whether the witnesses made a declaration under Article 17(3) of the UNDT RoP before giving their statements, or whether the witnesses were cross-examined by the opposing party under Article 17(1) of the UNDT RoP. UNAT set aside the UNDT judgment and remanded the case to UNDT for a fresh hearing based on the pleadings already on record in a matter consistent with the UNAT judgment.
The Applicant initiated two separate proceedings against decisions not to promote him to two different posts and UNDT consolidated both cases. UNDT found both decisions to be unlawful, awarding compensation.
A lack of a written record at the UNDT or first-instance level will greatly impede UNAT’s ability to make a decision on appeal.