�山����

UNAT considered an appeal by the staff member and an appeal by the Secretary-General. UNAT upheld both UNDT’s finding that the decision to close the investigation was improper as well as UNDT’s refusal to order rescission of that decision on account of the subject of the investigation having separated from the Organisation. UNAT, however, vacated UNDT’s moral damages award on the grounds that the staff member did not present any evidence, apart from his own unsworn testimony to support the claim. UNAT held that “generally speaking, the testimony of an applicant alone without corroboration by independent evidence (expert or otherwise) affirming that non-pecuniary harm has indeed occurred is not satisfactory proof to support an award of damages”. As the staff member’s testimony was the only evidence presented to support his allegation of harm to his reputation and general well-being, UNAT held that UNDT committed an error of law in stating that this alone was sufficient to sustain an award of compensation under Article 10. 5(b) of the UNDT Statute. UNAT dismissed the staff member’s appeal, granted the Secretary-General’s appeal in part, and vacated the award of damages ordered in judgment No. UNDT/2016/007.