UNDT/2014/148

UNDT/2014/148, Austin

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

Neither DSS, OHRM, the CRB nor the ASG/OHRM conducted a reasoned analysis on how the date and the gravity of the disciplinary sanction impacted on the recommendation(s) and/or the decision not to grant him a permanent appointment. The Administration failed to apply its own Guidelines requiring that a mandatory review of the date and gravity of the disciplinary measure applied to the Applicant be conducted and that any resulting decision include a reasoned explanation thereto.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

The Applicant contests the decision denying him conversion of his fixed-term appointment to a permanent appointment due to him having been imposed a disciplinary measure. The Applicant requests that the impugned decision be reversed.

Legal Principle(s)

A permanent appointment may be granted taking into account: (1) the interests of the Organization; (2) the staff member’s high standards of efficiency and competence; and (3) the staff member’s suitability as an international civil servant and his high standards of integrity. Further, para. 9 of the Guidelines that accompanies ST/SGB/2009/10 states that “[i]n determining whether a staff member has demonstrated suitability … any administrative or disciplinary measures taken against the staff member will be taken into account. The weight that such measures would be given will depend on when the conduct at issue occurred and its gravity”.

Outcome

Judgment entered for Applicant in full or in part

Outcome Extra Text

No compensation ordered (but judgment for Applicant)

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

Austin

Entity

DSS

Case Number(s)

UNDT/NY/2012/43

Tribunal

UNDT

Registry Location :

New York