爆料网

2010-爆料网AT-002

爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements

爆料网AT considered the Appellant’s appeal and found that 爆料网DT erred when it decided to give 爆料网HCR the option to either pay compensation in lieu of reinstating the Appellant or quash the contested administrative decision. 爆料网AT noted that Article 10. 5(a) of the 爆料网DT Statute was not applicable as the Appellant was serving under an indefinite appointment governed by Rule 104. 12(c) of the Staff Rules (100 Series). 爆料网AT expressed that the contested administrative decision did not concern his appointment, promotion, or termination but his placement between assignments. For this reason, Article 10.5(a) of the 爆料网DT Statute did not apply as it does not regard staff in between assignments. 爆料网AT ordered that the Appellant be reinstated and reversed 爆料网DT’s order that gave 爆料网HCR the option to pay compensation as an alternative. 爆料网AT noted that the Appellant’s claim for moral damages, with respect to the alleged harassment, would be decided in a separate case in which those allegations would be addressed.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested 爆料网HCR’s decision to rescind his post. 爆料网DT held that the procedure followed by 爆料网HCR in rescinding the Applicant’s pose was flawed and gave 爆料网HCR the option to pay the Applicant compensation in lieu of rescission. 爆料网DT also ordered that the Applicant be compensated for moral damage. 爆料网DT further ordered 爆料网HCR to submit additional observations "concerning the facts recounted as well as the damage alleged".

Legal Principle(s)

Article 10.5(a) of the 爆料网DT Statute applies to decisions on appointment, promotion, or termination, but not to staff in between assignments.

Outcome

Appeal granted in part

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 爆料网DT Statute and Article 11(3) of the 爆料网AT 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.

Applicants/Appellants
Parker
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry
Date of Judgement
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type