UNDT/2015/083

UNDT/2015/083, Tavora-Jainchill

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The Tribunal rejected the application as being not receivable ratione materiae.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

The Applicant contested “[t]he refusal of the Respondent to convene a Joint Negotiating Committee [(“JNC”)] meeting in order to discuss the flexible workspace proposal, a matter of staff welfare and conditions of work requiring staff-management consultations with [UNSU]”.

Legal Principle(s)

The right to request a JNC meeting. The right to request a JNC meeting in order to discuss a matter of staff welfare and conditions of work is a derivative right of the elected UNSU President. UNSU Arbitration Committee decisions/rulings are final. The Arbitration Committee’s decisions/rulings are final (irrevocable), since it is the unique body with the competence to review alleged violations of the UNSU Statute and Regulations made by the elected UNSU officials and decide on sanctions if warranted. In accordance with sec. 8.2.5 and 8.2.6 of the UNSU Regulations, only decision(s) to impose sanction(s) on an elected UNSU official can be reviewed, but an application for a final review is to be filed only by the individual being sanctioned and is to be considered exclusively by the Arbitration Committee.UNDT has no jurisdiction over UNSU Arbitration Committee decisions/rulings. The Applicant is seeking a judicial decision to confirm her position that the December 2013 elections are not valid and that she has the right to call a meeting of the JNC at United Nations Headquarters.Any judicial determination on the application and the relief requested would result in the Tribunal adjudicating on a contested electoral issue over which it does not have jurisdiction with the effect of the Tribunal deciding on both the Applicant‘s right to continue her official function as President of UNSU and the right of the following three highest ranking officials after the UNSU President to continue their mandates after 17 December 2013, which will represent a direct determination on the validity of the December 2013 elections and its outcome for the leadership and the 45th Staff Council.The competence to rule on any dispute related to this matter belongs exclusively to the Arbitration Committee, and the Dispute Tribunal has no competence under art. 2.1(a) of its Statute to substitute review and /or enforce any of the Arbitration Committee’s decisions/ rulings, including the ones on contested electoral issues.

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.