UNDT/2012/136

UNDT/2012/136, Rahman

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

Impartiality of a judge is determined by two tests, subjective and objective. (Campos). The UNDT considered that the request for recusal was based on mere fact and no such conflict of interest or professional relationship existed between the honourable Judge and the two Thai nationals named.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

The Applicant requested the recusal of Judge Jean-Francois Cousin from these two cases, alleging that his role as an advisor to the Supreme Administrative Court of Thailand from 2002-2003 could potentially be a conflict of interest, as the two cases focus on allegations of wrongdoing and retaliation by the Applicant against two former Thai politicians.

Legal Principle(s)

N/A

Outcome

Dismissed on merits

Outcome Extra Text

The request for recusal was rejected.

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.

Full Judgment

Applicants/ Appellants

Rahman

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry Location :