UNDT/2009/094, Bernard
In accordance with former staff rule 104.12(b)(i) and provisional staff rule 4.13(c), the Applicant cannot claim a right to the renewal of her fixed-term appointment. The Applicant claims that the difficult working relationship she had with her supervisor led the latter, with the objective of getting rid of the former, to seek the reclassification of her post at a higher level. However, the Applicant does not prove that the non-extension of her appointment results solely from the desire of her supervisor to remove her from the service, nor that, consequently, the contested decision appears prima facie to be unlawful. To order the suspension of an administrative decision, it is necessary that the three conditions provided for under article 2, paragraph 2, of the Tribunal’s statute be fulfilled. Given that one of the conditions is not fulfilled – i.e. the contested decision does not appear prima facie to be unlawful – the Tribunal must reject the application without its being necessary to examine whether the other two conditions – urgency and irreparable damage - are fulfilled
The Applicant’s post was reclassified at a higher level and since she was not selected for another position within UNHCR, her fixed-term appointment will not be extended beyond its expiry date of 31 December 2009. The Applicant requests the Tribunal to suspend the implementation of the decision not to extend her fixed-term appointment.
N/A
The application to suspend the implementation of the contested decision until the management evaluation has been completed is rejected.