UNDT/2014/129, Christensen
Receivability: The Tribunal considered whether it has the requisite jurisdiction to make a determination on an application for interpretation of an order as opposed to a final judgment. Noting that: (i) there is no provision in the UNDT Statute or Rules of Procedure governing interpretation of orders or expressly prohibiting interpretation of a decision that is labeled “Order”; and (ii) that regardless of whether decisions on applications for suspension of action are labeled as orders or judgments, they determine substantial issues, the Tribunal, pursuant to articles 19 and 36 of the Rules of Procedure, held that a party requesting interpretation of an order for suspension of action should not be denied that right.
The Applicant initially filed an application for suspension of action to contest the decision to separate her from service effective 31 March 2014. This application was dismissed by the Tribunal in its Order No. 068 (NBI/2014). By the current application, the Applicant sought clarification on paragraphs 51 and 52 of Order No. 068 regarding the Respondent’s responsibilities towards her.
N/A
Although the Applicant sought interpretation of an Order, the Tribunal found her Application receivable. The Application was subsequently dismissed because the Tribunal considered it to be akin to a request for legal advice rather than a request for interpretation.