�山����

The UNAT noted that the essence of the administrative decision had been that the staff member was not entitled to cashed-up unused annual leave from a second appointment taken up within 12 months of relinquishing a first appointment after which such leave had been commutated.

The UNAT observed that the staff member’s request for management evaluation referred to the Administration’s alleged “continued failure” to compensate him the commutation of annual leave. The UNAT found that the reference reinforced a conclusion that it had been the consistent decision conveyed to him over several months that was the subject of his complaint.

The UNAT held that the essential nature of the decision had been to require repayment and that the precise amount of the payment had not been the administrative decision but only an elemental detail of it. The UNAT found that while the staff member had also challenged the detail of how much he should have to repay should he be obliged in law to do so, this had been a detail of the fundamental decision that he should repay all commutated leave.

The UNAT held that even if, in responding to the staff member’s correspondence, the Secretary-General had expanded upon the reasoning or even added further justifications for the decision, it was the decision and not the subsequently expressed discussion of its reasoning that had to be the subject of management evaluation. The UNAT concluded that the staff member had failed to seek management evaluation within the strict time limit.

The UNAT granted the appeal and reversed the UNDT’s Judgment.