UNDT/2012/182, Ur Rehman

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The UNDT stated several hurdles to the receivability of the present application, including with respect to receivability ratione personae, ratione temporis, and ratione materiae, although the UNDT also found that on the papers filed some of these issues would ordinarily warrant further examination had the application not been manifestly inadmissible. The UNDT found that the application was manifestly inadmissible because the Applicant failed to comply with the statutory requirement of submitting a request for management evaluation of the contested decision prior to filing an application with the UNDT . The application was dismissed.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

The Applicant filed an application contesting the decision of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (“UNHCR”) not to select and appoint him to the post of Telecom Operator in Pakistan.

Legal Principle(s)

Jurisdiction of the UNDT: Articles 2.1 and 3.1 of the Statute of the UNDT provide that it is competent to hear and pass judgment on an application against an administrative decision “alleged to be in non-compliance with the terms of appointment or the contract of employment” filed by any current or former staff member of the United Nations or any person making claims in the name of an incapacitated or deceased staff member. The limitations on the Tribunal’s jurisdiction have been affirmed by the United Nations Appeals Tribunal.Standing, locus standi: An applicant must have legal capacity and legal standing in order to invoke the jurisdiction of the Tribunal.Requirement of requesting management evaluation: Pursuant to art. 8.1 of the Statute of the Dispute Tribunal, read together with staff rule 11.2(a), an applicant must, as a mandatory first step, request management evaluation of a contested decision before filing an application with the UNDT. The purpose of such management evaluation is primarily to allow the management to review, and possibly correct, an administrative decision, which an individual concerned wishes to challenge, and thereby avoid unnecessary litigation before the UNDT.Ignorance of the law: Candidates for a public post are presumed to know the rules applicable to the employing corporation. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Outcome
Dismissed as not receivable

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.