UNDT/2024/094

UNDT/2024/094, Litviniuk

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The Tribunal recalled that the regulatory framework on termination for facts anterior does not limit it to cases where there has been a proven prior factual finding of misconduct or a conviction of crime. What is required is that there must be a fact anterior that detracts from the suitability of the prospective recruit due to concerns of efficiency, competence, and integrity. The fact must be of so serious a nature that it would have precluded the staff member’s appointment if it had been disclosed to the Organization during the recruitment process.

In the instant case, the Tribunal concluded that, in all the circumstances, the Respondent had sufficient evidence of facts anterior, to have decided against the suitability of the Applicant as a staff member. The decision to terminate the Applicant’s employment was, therefore, justified because had the information been known beforehand, the Applicant would have been precluded from appointment.

Accordingly, the Tribunal decided to deny the application in its entirety.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision to terminate her fixed-term appointment in accordance with staff regulation 9.3(a)(v) on grounds of facts anterior.

Legal Principle(s)

Pursuant to settled jurisprudence of the Tribunal, the facts anterior and their non-disclosure prior to appointment do warrant the termination of a staff member’s fixed-term appointment in accordance with staff regulation 9.3 (a)(v).

Outcome

Dismissed on merits

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.

Full Judgment

Applicants/ Appellants

Litviniuk

Entity

UNHCR

Case Number(s)

UNDT/GVA/2024/016

Tribunal

UNDT

Registry Location :

Geneva