2015-UNAT-573, Walden
UNAT considered a request for revision of judgment No. 2014-UNAT-436 as well as a motion requesting that UNAT strike certain paragraphs from it. UNAT held that the request did not fulfil the statutory requirements and constituted, in fact, a disguised attempt to re-open the case. UNAT held that his application was not receivable. UNAT dismissed the application for revision.
Previous UNAT judgment: The Applicant appealed the decision to terminate his appointment for knowingly misrepresenting his academic qualifications. In judgment No. 2014-UNAT-436, UNAT found that termination was not disproportionate to the offense, taking into account that the Applicant’s recruitment, in the first instance, was predicated on the existence of a degree subsequently established to be without merit and which would never have qualified him for selection by the Organisation. UNAT vacated judgment No. UNRWA/DT/2013/011.
To be successful in a request for revision, an applicant must show: the decisive facts were unknown to both UNAT and the party applying for revision at the time of the UNAT judgment; that such ignorance was not due to the negligence of the applicant; and that the facts identified would have been decisive in reaching the decision.