�山����

Ms. Larriera sought revision of the UNAT judgment on the grounds that new decisive facts had emerged from the French government regarding her relationship with the deceased participant of the UNJSPF, Mr. M. Specifically, she maintains that the French government has endorsed the findings of a Brazilian court that she was in a “stable union” with Mr. M., and that this has also been annotated on the death certificate of Mr. M.

UNAT observed that Ms. Larriera’s application for revision was untimely. In addition, UNAT concluded that these allegedly decisive facts occurred in 2021, well after the UNAT issued its 2020 Judgment. Thus, these cannot be considered “new facts” within the meaning of Article 11(1) of the Statute. In addition, UNAT held that these “new facts” did not suggest that the French authorities considered that Mr. M. was divorced from his wife (Ms. M.) or that Ms. Larriera had acquired the status of his spouse at the time of Mr. M.’s death.

UNAT also held that Ms. Larriera’s arguments about alleged errors of the UNAT in interpretation of the law did not bring her application within the parameters of Article 11(1) of the Statute. Her application constitutes a disguised attempt to re-open the case.  Her application was thus not receivable.