Ãå±±½ûµØ

UNDT/2009/034

UNDT/2009/034, Shashaa

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

Staff members with permanent appointments are afforded additional protections, particularly when nearing retirement age. Administration’s obligation to protect the position of a permanent staff member includes, at least, an enquiry and the taking of reasonable steps to ascertain if there were any suitable positions available for the staff member. The staff member is required to cooperate in this search but the responsibility for protecting the position of the permanent employee is primarily with the employer.The universal obligation of both employee and employer to act in good faith towards each other includes acting rationally, fairly, honestly and in accordance with the obligations of due process (affirming the Tribunal’s holding in James (2009)). Outcome: Although UNDP did not act in bad faith, it failed to act in accordance with its obligations in relation to the termination of the applicant’s 100 series appointment. Applicant is entitled to remedies (to be determined).

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

A UNDP staff member with a permanent 100 series appointment was assigned to a temporary 200 series post in northern Iraq. His local post in Jordan was originally protected by a lien. The temporary appointment got extended and the staff member eventually forfeited the lien on his post in Jordan. In April 2007, his 200 series contract was terminated, and the staff member was separated from service altogether despite his permanent appointment with UNDP. In response to his request for administrative review, UNDP recognized that he had never resigned from his permanent 100 series post and accepted that it had erred by not taking that appointment into account. Unsatisfied with the outcome of the review, the applicant appealed the decision to terminate his permanent appointment, contesting the manner in which the separation from service was carried out and requesting entitlements in addition to those UNDP had decided to give him.

Legal Principle(s)

N/A

Outcome
Judgment entered for Applicant in full or in part

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.