�山����

Reason for non-renewal; It is commonplace that once the Respondent gives a staff member a reason for the nonrenewal of contract, such a reason must be supported by facts (Islam 2011-UNAT-115); The fact that the Respondent conceded that he could not demonstrate the lack of funds leading to the non-renewal of the Applicant’s contract leads the Tribunal to draw the negative inference that UNICEF PCO had decided not to renew the Applicant’s contract based on other reasons that were disclosed neither to the Applicant nor to this Tribunal.; Furthermore, the Tribunal does not find that the fact that the Applicant’s former [position] remained vacant after her contract was not renewed is, in itself, evidence of a lack of funds.; There are situations in which while there are available funds, the functions of a staff member are no longer required. That can be due to a reduction in workload in a particular department or programme, or due to the fact that the functions of a staff member have been subsumed by changes and or a restructuring process. A non-renewal decision can be justified in such a scenario (see Filippova UNDT/2016/008, Ding Order No. 88; (GVA/2014), He UNDT/2017/071 generally). However, the obligation is on the Respondent to prove the changes in the operational realities or the restructuring exercise that justify the non-renewal of a contract. There is need, for example, to provide proof of workload prognosis to support the reduction in work, thereby supporting a non-renewal decision on grounds of reduction of work or restructuring (Filippova UNDT/2016/008, He UNDT/2017/071); In exercising its discretionary authority to reorganise its priorities and restructure its workforce, the Administration must act in a fair and rational manner, which is procedurally correct and proportionate and in full compliance with the law. Any such restructuring or reorganization must also be supported by factual evidence.; Any restructuring that would lead to non-renewal of contracts should, at a minimum, be documented so as to support the reason for the non-renewal and to avoid the abuse of managerial discretion. Herein, the absence of any documentation of the restructuring exercise leads the Tribunal to question if in fact a restructuring exercise took place.; Recalling that the Administration changed the reason provided for the non-renewal from lack of funding/funding constraints to a claim of restructuring with the Applicant’s; functions no longer in need, the Tribunal finds that the latter reason is ex post facto and is equally unsupported by evidence and cannot be and, indeed, was not substantiated.; The Respondent has failed to defend and support the validity of the reason for the nonrenewal decision given to the Applicant. The Tribunal is thus constrained to reach the conclusion that the Applicant’s non-renewal was unlawful. Consequently, and repeated with emphasis, the Tribunal can and will draw an adverse inference from the Respondent’s actions since to provide different reasons for the administrative decision as the case moved forward is indicative of arbitrariness, lack of transparency, lack of fairness and is devoid of accountability in the decision-making process at UNICEF PCO.; Is the Applicant entitled to any remedies?; “[A]ny consideration of an award of damages for persons who are recruited on FTAs must take into account, among other things, the term of the contract and the remainder of the said term, if any, at the time of any alleged breach”. It has also given consideration to the length of expectancy of renewal (Andreyev 2015-UNAT-501, Gakumba 2013-UNAT387); In assessing compensation, each case should be treated differently, taking into account the particular situation of the claimant and that this process carries “a certain degree of empiricism to evaluate the fairness of the ‘in lieu compensation’ to be fixed” (Mwamsaku 2012-UNAT-246); The Applicant had a reasonable expectation of the renewal of her contract for one year. Having regard to all the circumstances, the Tribunal finds it appropriate to set the amount of compensation to be paid to the Applicant in lieu of rescission of the decision not to renew her appointment in the amount of one-year net base salary.