2016-UNAT-626 | SYSTEM OF ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

2016-UNAT-626, Masri

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

UNAT held that, since the Appellant had not made an application to the UNRWA Internal Justice Committee on the issue of the recusal and conflict of interest, it would not permit the issue to be raised for the first time on appeal. UNAT held that the Appellant had failed to establish in his appeal that it was unreasonable for UNRWA DT to conclude that there was no evidence of bias in the decision to abolish his post. UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the UNRWA DT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

UNRWA DT Judgment: The Applicant, a former UNRWA DT’s staff member, contested the decision to abolish his post and transfer him to the Education Department, claiming that it was based on the personal bias by the full-time UNRWA DT Judge, who wanted to terminate his contract. The UNRWA DT Judge determining the instant case disclosed in the judgment that he knew the full-time Judge responsible for the contested decision on a professional basis and noted that, while he would ordinarily have recused himself from considering the case, it was not in the interest of justice for him to do so as it would mean that the Appellant’s case could not be adjudicated by the UNRWA DT or any other court and this would constitute a denial of justice. UNRWA DT found that there was no bias in the decision to abolish the Applicant’s post as it was a decision taken only in the interest of UNRWA DT, notably to meet the UNRWA DT’s need to recruit a translator with more seniority, responsibilities, and competencies than the Applicant. UNRWA DT rejected the Applicant’s claim that the decision to transfer him to the Education Department was unlawful. UNRWA DT also rejected the Applicant’s claim that the decision to place him on an OTI process was to ultimately terminate his appointment for non-satisfactory performance.

Legal Principle(s)

The test for determining whether a judge is biased is if a fair-minded and informed observer, having considered the facts, would conclude that there is a real possibility that the judge was biased. It is expected in the normal course of things that Judges, like other professionals, will know each other. The fact that persons share a professional relationship is not sufficient, on the face of it, to prove that there is a conflict of interest or bias.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on merits

Outcome Extra Text

No relief ordered; No relief ordered.

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

Masri

Entity

UNRWA

Case Number(s)

2015-732

Tribunal

UNAT

Registry Location :

New York