UNDT/2018/050, Valentine
The Tribunal stressed that the Applicant, contrary to his assertion, was not awarded compensation for loss of earnings. He was awarded material damages for his loss of opportunity.; The Tribunal reviewed the paragraph sought to be interpreted and was of the view that the Judgment was comprehensible and clear. The expression “net base salary” was found to be clear and unambiguous and to refer to gross salary minus staff assessment. It does; not include a post adjustment component. The Tribunal also clearly did not provide for the taking into consideration of a possible step increment in the calculation of the quantum of material damages.; The Tribunal found that the Applicant was in fact arguing for additional damages to be awarded, or, in the alternative seeking to appeal the decision under the guise of an application for interpretation.; Therefore, the Tribunal found that the application for interpretation was not receivable.
The Applicant filed an application for interpretation of Judgment Valentine UNDT/2017/004, dated 27 January 2017, in which the Tribunal rescinded the selection decision for the position of Chief of Transport Section (P-5), UNCTAD, advertised under Job Opening Number 13-ECO-UNCTAD-28179-R-Geneva and awarded the Applicant, inter alia, compensation for harm pursuant to art. 10.5(b) of the United Nations Dispute Tribunal Statute.
Interpretation is only needed to clarify the meaning of a judgment where there are reasonable doubts about the will of the Tribunal or the arguments leading to a decision. But if the judgment is comprehensible, whatever the opinion the parties may have about it or its reasoning, an application for interpretation is not admissible.; The purpose of an application for interpretation is not to seek an alteration to the Judgment but to obtain clarification of the decision itself.