2012-UNAT-214 | SYSTEM OF ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

2012-UNAT-214, Fradin De Bellabre

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

UNAT held that the contentions against judgment No. UNDT/2009/004 were not receivable since only appeals against judgments on merits are receivable. Regarding the contentions against judgment No. UNDT/2011/080, UNAT held that there was no need to produce further documents. UNAT held that UNDT had correctly applied Article 10. 5 of the UNDT Statute in ordering compensation in lieu and that the Appellant had no right to request UNAT to order his reinstatement. UNAT noted that the non-renewal was based on a tainted performance evaluation and that UNDT, therefore, ordered the rescission of the decision. UNAT held that UNDT had correctly assessed the chances of the Appellant’s contract being renewed if the irregularities had not happened and that UNDT had committed no error in finding that the probability of a different outcome to be low. UNAT held that the Appellant had failed to demonstrate that he had a legitimate expectation of renewal. UNAT held that the compensation granted by UNDT was in line with the UNAT jurisprudence. UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the UNDT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision not to renew his contract and requested separately for UNDT to suspend that decision. UNDT issued judgment No. UNDT/2009/004 rejecting the request for suspension of action. In judgment No. UNDT/2011/080 UNDT addressed the merits. UNDT found that the contested decision had been taken in violation of the applicable procedure. UNDT ordered the rescission of the contested decision or, alternatively, compensation in lieu of two months' net base salary. UNDT also ordered the Organisation to pay the Applicant compensation for non-pecuniary damages in the amount of one month's net base salary. The Applicant appealed against both judgments.

Legal Principle(s)

The amount of the compensation constituting an alternative to the execution of the rescission of an administrative decision on appointment, promotion or termination must be determined by UNDT on a case-by-case basis. UNDT has a discretionary power to decide whether to refer a case to the Secretary-General or to another competent authority.

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

Fradin De Bellabre

Entity

MINUSTAH

Case Number(s)

2011-224

Tribunal

UNAT

Registry Location :

New York