UNDT/2012/202, Dakamseh
The Dispute Tribunal shall not award exemplary or punitive damages. The Tribunal did not find any procedural flaws in the competitive review process as it was implemented in the Applicant’s case. All three candidates for the PIO posts were assessed against the same methodology and criteria adopted by the CRP. The Applicant was not accorded full and fair consideration for the second P-3 PIO post in UNMISS contrary to the policy adopted by the CRP. In this regard, there were both substantive and procedural irregularities on the part of the Respondent.The Applicant is entitled to compensation for the substantive and procedural irregularities occasioned to him by the failure by the Administration to follow its own procedures.
On 30 December 2011, the Applicant filed an Application contesting the termination of his fixed-term appointment with the United Nations Mission in Sudan (“UNMIS”) upon the closure of UNMIS and upon its transitioning to the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (“UNMISS”). The Applicant alleged that there were other P3 PIO posts in UNMISS and that he was not accorded full and fair consideration for these. He also alleged that there were procedural irregularities in this regard.
N/A
UNDT ordered the Respondent to pay the Applicant 16 months' net base salary in financial compensation.