2018-UNAT-852

2018-UNAT-852, Sarieddine

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

UNAT considered the Appellant’s appeal, requesting that the UNRWA DT judgment be vacated. UNAT agreed with UNRWA DT and upheld its findings that the Agency was entitled, under the provisions of paragraph 2 of FTI 01/2016, to fill the concerned post by means of a lateral transfer of current staff members. UNAT also agreed with, and upheld, the ruling that it was not within the remit of UNRWA DT to pronounce on the exercise of the Agency’s discretion in deciding on the lateral transfers unless there is evidence that the discretion was exercised arbitrarily or unlawfully. UNAT found that there was no evidence to support the allegation of arbitrary and unlawful exercise of discretion by the Agency as it relates to the contested transfer decision. Moreover, UNAT found no evidence of the assertions made by the Appellant that the selection process for the employment roster was corrupted and that he had been subjected to discrimination during the selection process. UNAT found no fault with the judgment of the UNRWA DT and, accordingly, affirmed the judgment and dismissed the appeal.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

The Applicant contested the Agency’s decision to reassign a staff member. UNRWA DT found that the Agency was entitled to fill the concerned post by means of transfer of a current staff member. UNRWA DT further considered that it was not within its remit to pronounce on the exercise of the Agency’s discretion in deciding on the lateral transfers unless the discretion was exercised arbitrarily or unlawfully. UNRWA DT held that the transfer, in this case, was not arbitrary or unlawful as the decision was taken in line with the LFO’s practice under FTI 01/2016 to process transfer requests before rostered candidates and to prioritize candidates based on their seniority. UNRWA DT further held that even if the Applicant’s contention that “the selection process for the employment roster was corrupted and he was subjected to discrimination during the selection process for not being a Palestine refugee” was true, it would be “not only…inadequately supported by evidence but…also irrelevant to the impugned decision [to] transfer…[the staff member] to a GF post of P&L Clerk”. UNRWA DT accordingly dismissed the application in its entirety.

Legal Principle(s)

UNRWA Area Staff Regulation 4. 3, together with FTI 01/2016, provide the basis for the lateral transfer of staff within the Agency. The Administration has the power to restructure and reorganize its units and its departments to lend to greater efficiency, and it is not up to the UNDT to pronounce on the exercise of this discretion unless there is evidence of arbitrary and unlawful exercise of the discretion. The filling of posts by transfer of existing staff represents an exception to the general principle that posts shall be filled through a competitive process.

Outcome
Appeal dismissed on merits

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
Sarieddine
Entity
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry Location :
Date of Judgment
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type
Document Topic/Theme :