�山����

Both parties appealed. UNAT held that UNDT erred by finding a valid contract of employment between Ms Al Hallaj and ESCWA since no letter of appointment was issued, only an offer of employment. UNAT held that a quasi-contract was formed, considering that Ms Al Hallaj had unconditionally accepted and had fully fulfilled all the conditions specified in the offer of employment. UNAT agreed with UNDT that the ESCWA Administration committed two major errors, in breach of its quasi-contractual obligations. UNAT held that the ESCWA Administration failed in its due diligence to specify clearly and fully the obligations, including obtaining a valid work visa, that Ms Al Hallaj was expected to fulfil. UNAT held that the mention that a valid visa could be needed in the offer letter created an obligation to assist in obtaining it. UNAT held that the ESCWA Administration failed in its obligation to provide assistance to Ms Al Hallaj in securing a work permit after it became aware that she did not have such a document. UNAT held that the failure by the ESCWA Administration to fulfil its quasi-contractual obligations towards Ms Al Hallaj engaged its responsibility and warranted an award of compensation. UNAT held that while UNDT was correct in holding that the decision to terminate Ms Al Hallaj’s appointment was unlawful, it erred in law when it awarded compensation for breach of her employment contract without having related it to any evidence of harm; and erred in fact leading to a manifestly unreasonable decision when it concluded that the medical report was not convincing evidence. UNAT held that there was no need to award Ms Al Hallaj any additional compensatory damages since Ms Al Hallaj was offered another position in the same division, at the same level, with the same job description, but did not respond to it, as she had started working for a private company. UNAT upheld the appeal and cross-appeal in part and partially modified the UNDT judgment to substitute the compensation awarded.