2016-UNAT-627 | SYSTEM OF ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

2016-UNAT-627, El Rush

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

UNAT rejected the request for an oral hearing and the production of documents since there was no need for further clarification. UNAT held that the Appellant’s contentions regarding the application of the Palestinian Labour Law No. 7 (2000) and the UNRWA DT’s error in calculating the time limits were misconceived. UNAT held that, regarding the procedure and timeline involved in challenging administrative decisions, former UNWRA Area Staff Rule 111. 3, which was in effect at the material time when the Appellant’s contract as a teacher was terminated, was applicable. UNAT agreed with the Commissioner-General that the Appellant’s reliance on the Agency’s letter which advised him he could file his appeal within 60 days was also misplaced, as that letter concerned issues arising from a later appointment with the Agency by which he was contracted as a Sanitation Labourer and was thus wholly unrelated to the present appeal. UNAT held that UNRWA DT had made no errors in law or fact in reaching the conclusion that the application was not receivable ratione temporis. UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision to terminate his contract as a teacher. UNRWA DT found that the application was not receivable ratione temporis since the Applicant had submitted his application over twelve months too late.

Legal Principle(s)

Left deliberately blank.

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.

Full Judgment

Applicants/ Appellants

El Rush

Entity

UNRWA

Case Number(s)

2015-734

Tribunal

UNAT

Registry Location :

New York