Ãå±±½ûµØ

UNAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. UNAT held that as the Secretary-General had clearly established the UNDT’s lack of jurisdiction, UNAT, therefore, made an exception to the general rule that only appeals against final decisions are receivable. UNAT held that, as the issue of jurisdiction did not go directly to the merits of the case, there was a need to receive the appeal at that time rather than to wait for the issue to be raised in an appeal against the final judgment. UNAT held that the appeal was receivable. On the merits, UNAT held that UNDT’s finding that there was one single claim with two heads of damages, one relating to the gross negligence by the Administration and one relating to the amount of compensation awarded to Mr Wamalala, was seriously flawed. UNAT held that Mr Wamalala’s claim of negligence constituted a separate basis for compensation outside of the framework of Appendix D to the Staff Regulations and Rules, the workers’ compensation system. UNAT held that a workers’ compensation system is a no-fault insurance or scheme whereby employers must cover occupational injury or illness and that employees do not have to prove employer’s negligence in order to obtain benefits. UNAT held that a claim of gross negligence against the Administration is a separate action which could not be included in a claim made by a staff member under Appendix D. UNAT held that Mr Wamalala did not submit his claim of gross negligence to the Secretary-General for consideration and decision and subsequently for management evaluation. UNAT held that his claim was not receivable ratione materiae and the claim of gross negligence was not receivable by UNDT. UNAT allowed the appeal and set aside UNDT’s finding that the claim of gross negligence was receivable by UNDT.