Ãå±±½ûµØ

2019-UNAT-974

2019-UNAT-974, Salah

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

UNAT held that the Appellant failed to identify grounds for his appeal. UNAT held that the Appellant’s case was fully and fairly considered. UNAT held that UNRWA DT correctly based its conclusion about the legality of the termination decision on the medical assessment by the medical board and without medical findings of its own. UNAT held that the decision to terminate the Appellant’s appointment on medical grounds was a reasonable and valid exercise of UNRWA’s discretion. UNAT held that the Appellant did not meet the burden of proof of demonstrating an error in the impugned judgment such as to warrant its reversal. UNAT held that new issues raised by the Appellant were not receivable, as they were not brought before UNRWA DT and could not be introduced for the first time for consideration by UNAT. UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the UNDT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision to terminate his fixed-term appointment on medical grounds. UNRWA DT dismissed his application, finding that no reasons had been advanced to show that the termination decision was the product of substantive or procedural irregularity.

Legal Principle(s)

The appeals procedure is of a corrective nature, and it is not an opportunity for a dissatisfied party to reargue his or her case. UNAT can only review the recommendation of a medical board if there is evidence of improper motive or some substantive or procedural irregularity. An appellant has the burden of satisfying UNAT that the judgment he or she seeks to challenge is defective.

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.