2010-惇蹋厙AT-062

惇蹋厙AT Held or 惇蹋厙DT Pronouncements

The Secretary-General filed appeals against 惇蹋厙DT Orders. 惇蹋厙AT determined that, generally, only appeals against final judgments are receivable. 惇蹋厙AT noted that an interlocutory appeal is receivable exceptionally in cases where 惇蹋厙DT has clearly exceeded its jurisdiction or competence. 惇蹋厙AT held that it would not interfere lightly with the broad discretion of 惇蹋厙DT in the management of cases. Further, 惇蹋厙AT noted that one of the goals of the new system of administration of justice is rendering timely judgments; cases before 惇蹋厙DT could seldom proceed if either party were able to appeal interlocutory decisions. 惇蹋厙AT held that in this case, it saw no reason to depart from the general rule that only appeals against final judgments are receivable. 惇蹋厙AT dismissed the Secretary-General＊s interlocutory appeals as not receivable.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The staff member contested his non-selection for the post of ASG/DESA. Before and during the hearing of the case, 惇蹋厙DT issued a series of Orders (i. e. Order Nos. 40, 42, 43, 44 and 46 (NY/2010)).

Legal Principle(s)

惇蹋厙AT generally has no jurisdiction to receive interlocutory appeals (i. e. appeals against rulings made during the course of trial before a final judgment is rendered). Interlocutory appeals are only receivable where 惇蹋厙DT has clearly exceeded its jurisdiction or competence.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on receivability

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 惇蹋厙DT Statute and Article 11(3) of the 惇蹋厙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

Bertucci

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement