2019-UNAT-910

2019-UNAT-910, Newland

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

UNAT considered Mr Newland’s application for interpretation of judgment No. 2018-UNAT-820. UNAT held that, given that Mr Newland had already been paid Special Post Allowance, Hazard pay, and outstanding interest, the only questions requiring determination were whether he was entitled to payment of Rest and Recuperation (R&R), free tickets, and the relocation grant. UNAT accepted that there was a degree of uncertainty regarding these questions. UNAT held that Mr Newland’s claim that he was entitled to the payment of R&R was unsustainable, as it was not an accruable benefit or entitlement. UNAT held that Mr Newland’s claim for free tickets to travel to the place of R&R was unsustainable as the Organisation provided free transportation. UNAT held that Mr Newland’s claim for relocation grant was not part of the execution of the judgment. UNAT declared that the Administration had finalised its execution of judgment No. 2018-UNAT-820.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

Previous UNAT judgment: In judgment No. 2018-UNAT-820, UNAT dismissed the appeal against the decision of UNDT on receivability. UNAT held that the Appellant’s appeal against UNDT’s failure to determine if the Secretary-General was in non-compliance with the suspension order was well-founded. UNDT had granted relief with the express intention of staying the Applicant’s separation from service until the dispute was resolved. Accordingly, UNAT ordered the Appellant to be paid his full salary and all associated entitlements and benefits for the period from the date of the suspension order under the UNDT judgment, together with interest, within 30 days of the issuance of judgment No. 2018-UNAT-820. Subsequently, the Administration made three payments to the Appellant without the interest mandated by UNAT. The Administration also denied the Appellant’s request for a relocation grant for his previous relocation.

Legal Principle(s)

An application for interpretation of judgment will be admitted if the parties disagree on the meaning or scope of the judgment because it is unclear or ambiguous.

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.

Full Judgment

Applicants/ Appellants

Newland

Entity

UNSOS

Case Number(s)

2018-1204

Tribunal

UNAT

Registry Location :

New York