2016-UNAT-655, Elhabil
UNAT addressed all the appeals in a unique judgment. Regarding judgment No. UNDT/2015/100, UNAT held that UNDT had correctly found that a UNRWA staff member cannot bring an application against the 山Secretary-General challenging a decision by the Organisation denying him or her employment with the Organisation. UNAT held that UNDT had correctly concluded that the application was not receivable. Regarding Orders Nos. 319, 320, and 400, UNAT reiterated that UNAT is only under exceptional circumstances competent to judge appeals of interlocutory orders, namely when UNDT exceeded its jurisdiction or competence. UNAT held that the Appellant had not claimed on appeal that UNDT had exceeded its jurisdiction or competence in issuing the orders. UNAT held, therefore, that the appeals of Orders Nos. 319. 320 and 400 were not receivable ratione materiae. UNAT dismissed the appeal against judgment No. UNDT/2015/100 and affirmed the UNDT judgment on receivability. UNAT dismissed the appeals against Orders Nos. 319 (NBI/2015), 320 (NBI/2015), and 400 (NBI/2015) as not receivable.
The Applicant contested the decision that disqualified his candidacy to posts in the UN. UNDT issued judgment No. UNDT/2015/100 dismissing the application as non-receivable since the Applicant was a UNRWA staff member and was not challenging an administrative decision within the meaning of Article 2. 1(a) of the UNDT Statute. The Applicant appealed this judgment on receivability. The Applicant further filed two applications for suspension of action pending management evaluation. Each application challenged a decision by the Office of Human Resources Management (OHRM) to disqualify the Applicant as a candidate for a job opening in the UN. UNDT issued Order Nos. 319 and 320 (NVBI/215) dismissing the applications as non-receivable ratione personae. The Applicant appealed both orders. The Applicant filed another application before UNDT for suspension of action pending management evaluation of a decision by OHRM to disqualify his application for the position of Director, Documentation Division, D-2, Department for General Assembly and Conference Management. In Order No. 400 (NBI/2015), UNDT dismissed this application on the same grounds as the previous applications for suspension of action. UNDT put “on notice” that the costs under Article 10. 6 of the UNDT Statute could be awarded against the Applicant if he were to bring another, similar, application in the future. The Applicant appealed this last decision as well.
A UNRWA staff member does not fulfill the requirements of Article 3 of the UNDT Statute. The general principle underlying the right to appeal under Article 2. 1 of the UNAT Statute is that only appeals against final judgments will be receivable.