2012-UNAT-235, Wilson
To the extent that the UNDT’s Order acknowledged that the Appellant withdrew his application and granted the request for withdrawal, UNAT upheld the Order. In every other regard, UNAT upheld the arguments made by the Appellant as to the manner in which UNDT granted the withdrawal request. UNAT held that UNDT erred in law and went beyond its jurisdiction in effectively embarking on a consideration of the merits of the case and in speculating about the Appellant’s motivation in bringing his application. UNAT ordered that the recital of “Facts” in paragraphs 4 to 7 and “Considerations” in paragraphs 8 to 11 should be redacted from Order No. 127 (GVA/2011).
The Applicant contested the decision by the former Director-General of the United Nations Office at Vienna (UNOV) concerning the waiving of immunities regarding traffic violations that occurred in a staff member’s private capacity. The Applicant informed UNDT that he had decided to withdraw his application. In Order No. 127(GVA/2011), UNDT declared the closure of the case without adjudication of its merits. However, in the course of its “Considerations” UNDT observed that the arguments put forward by the Applicant raised concerns about the true motivation and good faith of the Applicant and seemed to point towards abuse of proceedings.
Left deliberately blank