2021-UNAT-1152, Ashraf Zaqqout
UNAT considered an application for revision of Judgment No. 2020-UNAT-1055. UNAT found that none of the three new facts sought to be relied on by the applicant could have changed the outcome in any decisions entered against him in the UNRWA DT, and this test being one of four, all of which must exist for a judgment to be revised, Mr. Zaqqout’s application was dismissed.
In Judgment No. UNRWA/DT/2020/006, the UNRWA DT dismissed as not receivable Mr. Zaqqout’s applications challenging the monthly extensions of his Limited Duration Contracts and eventually the non-extension of his final contract. In Judgment No. 2020-UNAT-1055, the Appeals Tribunal dismissed Mr. Zaqqout’s appeal.
The elements necessary for a revision are i) that a “decisive” fact must have been discovered (the fact must be decisive in the sense that it will, if considered, change the outcome of the decided appeal); ii) the applicant must show that when the Judgment was rendered, this decisive fact was unknown to the Appeals Tribunal and to the applicant; iii) that omission cannot have been the result of negligence; and iv) the applicant must have made his application for revision within the period of 30 calendar days after the discovery of the decisive fact and within one year of the issuing of the Judgment. For the purpose of time limits for filing an application for revision, the date a UNAT Judgment is considered to have been rendered is the date the translation of the Judgment into the language in which the self-represented applicant operates has been received by the applicant.
The application for revision is dismissed.