�山����

Under the United Nations Staff Regulations and Rules, termination indemnity may only be paid to staff members whose contracts have been terminated, not staff who resigned. Under the Staff Regulations and Rules, termination indemnity cannot be paid in the case of resignation by way of “deserved recognition” for lengthy service. Concerning the issue whether the matter of termination indemnity could be subject to negotiations, a claim for such a payment outside the applicable rules where explicit written commitment to that effect had been made by the administration was endorsed by UNAT. The Tribunal notes the existence of a general principle of due diligence and good faith towards staff members enshrined in the United Nations Charter. Specifically, as many times stressed by the Tribunal, the primary responsibility for effecting timely and accurate payment of entitlements due to staff members rests with the United Nations Administration. In dealing with a bureaucracy that is presumed professional and whose acts are to be presumed regular, it is not to be required of a staff member to be constantly monitoring, following-up, reminding, verifying and nagging. Proving moral injury requires showing beyond a balance of probabilities the existence of factors causing harm to the victim’s personality rights or dignity. Among other, the loss of a positive state of emotional gratification or emotional balance is harm deserving of compensation. For a breach or infringement to give rise to moral damages, especially in a contractual setting, where normally a pecuniary satisfaction for a patrimonial injury is regarded as sufficient to compensate a complainant for actual loss as well as the vexation or inconvenience caused by the breach, then, either the contract or the infringing conduct must be attended by peculiar features, or must occur in a context of peculiar circumstances. Once the staff member has chosen the lump sum as the form of exercising the entitlement to unaccompanied shipment, the claim and its equivalent obligation on the part of the administration are transformed into a purely monetary one. As such, the right to compensation for the administration’s failure to effect a timely payment turns on the showing of a financial and moral damage. The presence of certain circumstances may lead to the presumption of moral injury – res ipsa loquitur. Circumstances of a certain case may permit the application of the evidentiary presumption that such damages will normally follow as a consequence to an average person being placed in the same situation of the applicant. Two types of situations give rise to a claim for compensation for moral injury: first, breach of a fundamental nature, whereupon occurrence of moral injury in the form of harm to dignitas is presumed, and second, where the nature of the breach is not automatically leading to a moral injury, or the injury is of such dimension or nature that would usually need to be proven through evidence of particular stress or anxiety.