2013-UNAT-330, Nwuke
UNAT considered two appeals, one against Order No. 103 (NBI/2012) and one against judgment No. UNDT/2012/116. UNAT held that the Appellant had not established any excess of jurisdiction or competence on the part of UNDT; rather, his claims addressed the merits of the UNDT decision. UNAT noted that even if the UNDT had erred in law or fact and as also alleged in the case, committed an error of procedure, this did not instance any excess of jurisdiction or competence on its part such as would entitle the Appellant to bypass the exception to the right to appeal set out in Article 2(2) of the UNDT Statute. UNAT held that the appeals were not receivable. UNAT dismissed the appeals.
UNDT order and judgment: In the context of a dispute over the appointment of another individual to a post for which he had applied, the Applicant submitted a request for a suspension of action. In Order No. 103 (NBI/2012), UNDT rejected the request. In judgment No. UNDT/2012/116, UNDT set out the reasons as to why the request for suspension of action had not been granted.
Appeals from the UNDT on suspension of action decisions will be receivable only if UNDT, in adjudicating on such applications, exceeded its competence or jurisdiction.