2020-UNAT-1059, Bezziccheri
UNAT considered an application for revision of judgment No. 2019-UNAT-948 by Ms Bezziccheri. UNAT considered Ms Bezziccheri’s claim that ST/AI/2019/1 was unknown to her and UNAT at the time the judgment was issued. Noting the three elements that an applicant for revision must establish cumulatively before a final judgment of UNAT can be revised, UNAT held that the fact that ST/AI/2019/1 was known to UNAT when it issued its judgment (as it had been referred to therein) was sufficient in and of itself to fail the cumulative test. Further, UNAT noted that ST/AI/2019/1 was not determinative of Ms Bezziccheri’s case, but that it was referred to by UNAT as a non-binding suggestion to help the parties. UNAT dismissed the application for revision.
In judgment No. 2019-UNAT-948, UNAT dismissed the Appellant’s appeal and affirmed the decision of UNDT in which it had declined to recommend her for consideration for a disability benefit by the United Nations Staff Pension Committee (UNSPC).
The three elements that an applicant for revision must establish cumulatively before a final judgment of UNAT can be revised are: (1) the previously absent fact must be decisive of the case; (2) that fact must have been unknown to UNAT and the Applicant at the time the UNAT judgment was rendered; and (3) such ignorance of the fact cannot have been attributable to negligence, presumably of the applicant.