Ãå±±½ûµØ

2023-UNAT-1397

2023-UNAT-1397, Ibrahim Ahmad Fanous

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The UNAT found that the UNRWA DT did not err in its award of in-lieu compensation. It appropriately considered Mr. Fanous’ chance of selection for the post when it stated that it considered there was no guarantee of a future selection. The UNRWA DT applied a context-specific lump sum amount.  It considered the likelihood of selection and Mr. Fanous’ salary at the time. It made a determination that was fair and just in the present case but also took a principled approach that considered all relevant considerations.

As to Mr. Fanous’ request for moral damages, with regard to the First and Second Contested Decision, the UNAT found that the UNRWA DT did not err in denying Mr. Fanous’ request for moral damages in the absence of sufficient evidence.

Turning to the Third Contested Decision, the UNAT found that there was no evidence that the shortlisting was not based on objective criteria. Although Mr. Fanous had the required experience, he failed to properly provide that information in his application and his PHF did not reflect his supervisory experience. The UNAT found that the UNRWA Dispute Tribunal did not err when it held that Mr. Fanous failed to discharge his burden to rebut the presumption that the Agency improperly exercised its discretion in the Third Contested Decision

Legal Principle(s)

The purpose of in-lieu compensation is to place the staff member in the same position they would have been in, had the unlawful decision not been made. 

The Dispute Tribunal must set compensation following a principled approach and on a case-by-case basis. 

The determination of the quantum of in-lieu compensation will depend on the circumstances of each case.  Many factors can be considered, including the nature of the post occupied, the remaining time of appointment, the salary difference, the number of candidates involved, and the possibility of selection.

Moral damages: The claimant bears the burden to establish, on a balance of probabilities, three elements: the harm itself, an illegality, and a nexus between both. Therefore, the harm must be shown to be directly caused by the unlawful administrative decision in question.

An entitlement to moral damages may arise where there is evidence by way of a medical, psychological report or otherwise of harm, stress or anxiety caused to the staff member, which can be directly linked, or reasonably attributed, to a breach of his or her substantive or procedural rights and where the Tribunal is satisfied that the stress, harm or anxiety is such as to merit a compensatory award. 

The Agency has broad discretion in matters of staff selection. In non-selection cases, all official acts are presumed to have been regularly performed, if the Agency can minimally show that full and fair consideration was given.  The staff member can rebut this presumption, through clear and convincing evidence, that the procedures were violated, the Panel was biased or discriminated against the candidate, relevant material was ignored, or irrelevant material was considered, or other grounds depending on the facts of the case.

Outcome
Appeal dismissed on the merits; Cross-appeal dismissed on the 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.

Applicants/ Appellants
Ibrahim Ahmad Fanous
Entity
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry Location :
Date of Judgment
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type