2013-UNAT-310

2013-UNAT-310, Nasrallah

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

UNAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. UNAT held that it was satisfied that the sanction was not disproportionate and noted that the Secretary-General could have chosen to summarily dismiss Mr Nasrallah or to separate him without compensation and indemnities. UNAT held that, although no investigation was necessary as the facts were not contested, the Organisation committed an egregious error in taking almost two years to finalise the disciplinary proceedings. UNAT noted that this delay worked in Mr Nasrallah’s favour, permitting him to benefit from two years’ further service. UNAT upheld the appeal and vacated the UNDT judgment in its entirety.

Accountability Referral: UNAT referred the case to the Secretary-General for possible action to enforce accountability regarding the severe delay in the disciplinary proceedings.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

The Applicant contested his separation from service with compensation in lieu of notice and with termination indemnity, following his arrest and incarceration for the use of illegal drugs. UNDT found that the sanction imposed was disproportionate, ordered rescission of the decision or compensation in the alternative, with the restoration of lost earnings.

Legal Principle(s)

When reviewing a disciplinary sanction imposed by the Administration, the role of the Tribunal is to examine whether the facts on which the sanction is based have been established, whether the established facts qualify as misconduct, and whether the sanction is proportionate to the offence. UNAT should not substitute its own judgment for that of the Secretary-General. Having established misconduct and the seriousness of the incident, UNAT can only review the level of a sanction imposed in cases of obvious absurdity or flagrant arbitrariness.

Outcome

Appeal granted

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

Nasrallah

Entity

UNIFIL

Case Number(s)

2012-346

Tribunal

UNAT

Registry Location :

New York