UNDT/2021/060, El-Alwar
UNDT denied the Applicant’s motion in which he sought the disclosure of an extensive amount of additional documents, as it was filed after the end of the collection of evidence and after the submissions of closing statements. UNDT held that the contested non-renewal decision was unlawful because the provided reason for it, namely lack of funding, was not based on correct facts. It was therefore not necessary for UNDT to examine whether the decision was tainted by ulterior motives, as also argued by the Applicant. UNDT held that the most appropriate remedy for the Applicant would be rescission of the unlawful decision not to renew his fixed-term appointment and his reinstatement in the same position he encumbered. UNDT set the amount of the compensation in lieu at 3 months’ net-base salary at the P-5 level as per the salary scale in effect at the time of the Applicant’s separation from service. UNDT also granted compensation for income loss in the amount of 3 months of net-base salary.
The Applicant contested the decision not to renew his fixed-term appointment.
The Tribunal is aware that a fixed-term appointment does not carry any expectancy of renewal and expires automatically without prior notice on the expiration date. The Administration is, nevertheless, required to provide a reason for such a non-renewal upon the relevant staff member’s request, and this reason must be lawful and based on correct facts. The staff member has to demonstrate to have done efforts to mitigate the economic loss arising from an administrative decision impacting on his employment.