Ãå±±½ûµØ

2015-UNAT-579

2015-UNAT-579, Achkar

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

UNAT held that the Appellant failed to identify the grounds for his appeal and thus, the appeal was defective. UNAT inferred that the Appellant claimed UNRWA DT failed to exercise its jurisdiction. UNAT held that the legal conclusion of UNDT that the application before it was not receivable was unassailable. UNAT held that UNRWA DT did not err when it did not discuss whether the case was an exceptional case for extending, waiving, or suspending the deadline for the filing of the application. UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the UNRWA DT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

UNRWA DT judgment: The Applicant filed an application before UNRWA DT seeking monetary damages in the amount of USD 3 million for having been denied employment for the preceding ten years and for the alleged threats made against him when he travelled to and from Gaza in 2002. UNRWA DT summarily dismissed the application on the ground that it was not filed in a timely manner and therefore was not receivable.

Legal Principle(s)

An appellant has the burden of satisfying UNAT that the judgment being appealed is defective; he or she must identify the alleged defects in the judgment and state the grounds relied upon in asserting that the judgment is defective.

Outcome
Appeal dismissed on merits

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.