Ãå±±½ûµØ

UNAT denied the Appellant’s motion for additional pleadings because he did not demonstrate the existence of exceptional circumstances. UNAT also found no fault with UNDT’s holding that the decision to relocate the Appellant was lawful. UNAT noted that an accepted method for determining whether the reassignment of a staff member to another position was proper is to assess whether the new post was at the staff member’s grade; whether the responsibilities involved corresponded to his or her level; whether the functions to be performed were commensurate with the staff member’s competence and skills; and, whether he or she had substantial experience in the field. UNAT found that the decision to change the Appellant’s duty station was based on circumstances external to the Appellant and fell entirely within the Administration's remit. UNAT held that the decision was not based on any improper motive and was not in breach of any mandatory procedures. UNAT also found that the Appellant was only entitled to the DSA and hardship allowances applicable to Baghdad for the days that he actually spent there. UNAT affirmed UNDT’s judgment in its entirety.