UNDT/2014/091 | SYSTEM OF ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

UNDT/2014/091, Bien-Aime

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

There being no evidence that real ongoing informal resolution efforts took place between the date on which the Applicant was notified of the decision on 26 May 2011 and when he filed his request for management evaluation on 4 August 2011, the time limit was not extended and his request for management evaluation was not receivable (time barred). The Tribunal concludes that there was no genuine informal resolution efforts conducted by the Office of the Ombudsman and there was no request for extension of time addressed to the Secretary-General by the Applicant. The 4 August 2011 request for management evaluation, including the updated 19 August 2011 request, were filed after the expiration of the applicable time limit and at no time was the deadline for filing a request for management evaluation extended at the initiative of the Secretary-General. The request for management evaluation being out of time, the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to consider the Applicant’s appeal and it is not receivable ratione materiae.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

The Applicant appealed the decisions to reassign him from the Personnel Section to the Security Section in the United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti during the course of an investigation and the removal of his computer’s hard drive during that process. The Applicant submitted that even though he filed his request for management evaluation after the expiry of the 60 day time limit, his request was receivable as he had been engaged in informal resolutions with the Office of the Ombudsman.

Legal Principle(s)

N/A

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.

Full Judgment

Applicants/ Appellants

Bien-Aime

Entity

MINUSTAH

Case Number(s)

UNDT/NY/2011/93

Tribunal

UNDT

Registry Location :

New York