UNDT/2011/179, Larkin
The fact that OSLA counsel have fulfilled in the past other functions within the Organization does not generally disqualify them from discharging their new duties. Outcome: Application rejected on the merits
The Applicant complained about the non-disclosure of a conflict of interest, which he claimed stemmed from the fact that the Chief of OSLA had served, prior to his taking up his current functions, with UNHCR, whose management had made the contested decisions in the cases he intended to file with OSLA assistance. By a previous judgment, the Tribunal rejected the application as irreceivable, but also finding that it had no merits. The Appeals Tribunal remanded the case for a trial on the merits. The Tribunal found that the alleged conflict of interest could not reasonably be seen to exist. The mere prior employment relationship of the Chief of OSLA with UNHCR falls short of supporting the conclusion that OSLA was prevented from correctly discharging its mandate. Hence, there was not obligation to disclose on the part of OSLA.
N/A