UNDT/2011/059, Pirnea
The Tribunal found that there could not be an absolute and general rule that the failure to give reasons amounts to an unlawful exercise of the discretion not to renew. Nor should there be a rule that reasons should never be given. Having found that the decision was not prima facie illegal, the requirements provided for in Article 13 of the Rules of Procedure to grant suspension of action were not met.Outcome: the application was dismissed.
The Applicant, a UNDSS Field Security Officer in Somalia appointed under a UNDP contract, filed an application for suspension of action of the decision not to renew his appointment. Following allegations of sexual assaults against him in Hargeisa (Somalia), UNDSS physically moved him to Nairobi (Kenya) for his own protection but his official duty station remained Hargeisa. A few days before the expiry of his contract, the Applicant contested the impugned decision on the ground that it was prima facie unlawful. He argued that his post was neither identified for abolition nor his performance warranted separation from service and he had not been given any reasons for the non-renewal of his appointment. He was therefore of the view that the decision necessarily arbitrary and capricious.
N/A