2011-��AT-117

��AT Held or ��DT Pronouncements

The Appellant appealed the amount of compensation awarded for loss of chance. ��AT noted that there was no set way for the trial court to set damages for loss of chance of promotion and that each case turned on its facts. ��AT noted that it would generally defer to the trial court��s discretion. ��AT did not accept the Appellant��s argument that the trial court was required to assess the percentage chances that he would have been selected: ��AT held that while it had approved that procedure as one method of assessing damages, it respected the opinion of the trial judge as to how to determine damages in each particular case. ��AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the ��DT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision to bring disciplinary charges against him. ��DT awarded: three months�� net base salary as compensation for the loss of a chance of being considered for two posts, as he had been barred from applying for them as a result of the ongoing disciplinary proceedings; compensation for additional transportation costs; and six months�� net base salary as moral compensation.

Legal Principle(s)

There is no set way for the trial court to set damages for loss of chance of promotion; each case must turn on its facts.

Outcome

Appeal 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 ��DT Statute and Article 11(3) of the ��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

Lutta

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement