Ãå±±½ûµØ

2017-UNAT-759, Hassanin

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

UNAT vacated UNDT’s compensation orders in the cases in which staff members had secured alternative employment, finding that the applications had become moot. In the remaining cases, UNAT considered that any permanent staff member facing termination due to abolition of post must show an interest in a new position (for which he or she is suitable and qualified) by timely and completely applying for that position. However, once the application process is completed, the Administration is required by Staff Rule 13. 1(d) to consider the permanent staff member on a preferred or non-competitive basis for the position in an effort to retain the permanent staff member, which the Administration failed to do in this case. Accordingly, UNAT upheld UNDT’s findings that the termination decisions were unlawful in cases in which the respective staff members had complied with the aforementioned requirement to apply for alternative positions and vacated UNDT’s findings in cases where the staff members had failed to submit timely and complete applications for positions for which they were suitable and qualified. In the former cases, UNAT upheld the award of in-lieu compensation, albeit, unlike UNDT, not reducing the total amount by the termination indemnity paid but vacated the award of moral damages for lack of evidence of harm; in the latter cases, UNAT vacated UNDT’s order of in-lieu compensation and moral damages.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

KSeveral former staff members in the Publishing Division of the Department for General Assembly and Conference Management (DGACM) filed applications before UNDT challenging the decision to terminate their permanent appointments following the abolition of posts in DGACM. UNDT held that the Administration had failed to act fully in compliance with Staff Rules 9. 6 and 13. 1 by subjecting permanent staff members to the requirement of competing for available posts against other non-permanent staff members and by failing to reassign permanent staff members as a matter of priority to another post matching their abilities and grade. UNDT ordered, in all cases in which staff members had not secured another position with the Organisation at the time of their application with UNDT, rescission of the termination decision or, in lieu of rescission, two years’ net base salary minus any termination indemnity paid to him or her. In addition, UNDT awarded compensation for emotional distress.

Legal Principle(s)

The Organisation has the obligation to give priority consideration to permanent staff members facing termination due to abolition of post. Staff members, on the other hand, have the obligation to timely submit completed applications for positions for which they are suitable and qualified.

Outcome
Appeal granted

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.

Applicants/ Appellants
Hassanin
Entity
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry Location :
Date of Judgment
Judge(s)
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type