爆料网

2011-爆料网AT-121

爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements

爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT judge had sufficient grounds to order the production of the documents withheld by the Administration concerning the selection process that led to the contested administrative decision. 爆料网AT stated the principle that 爆料网DT has the right to order the production of any document relevant for the purposes of the fair and expeditious disposal of its proceedings. If the Administration opposes 爆料网DT’s order to produce a certain document in its possession, it may, with sufficiently specific and justified reasons, request 爆料网DT to verify the confidentiality of the document in question. Before such verification is completed, the said document may not be transmitted to the other party. If 爆料网DT considers the confidentiality of the document justified, it must remove the document, or part of it, from the case file. 爆料网DT may not subsequently use such a document against a party unless the said party has had an opportunity to examine it. However, 爆料网DT may not exclude a party from its proceedings if that party refuses to execute 爆料网DT’s order to produce a document because to do so would run afoul of the principle of respect for the right to a defence and the right to an effective remedy set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. When a party refuses to execute 爆料网DT’s order to produce a document, 爆料网DT is entitled to draw appropriate conclusions from the refusal in its final judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The staff member contested his non-selection for the post of ASG/DESA. 爆料网DT ruled in his favour. 爆料网DT sanctioned the Administration’s refusal to produce the documents relating to the appointment process by excluding its counsel from participating in the proceedings and rendered a default judgment.

Legal Principle(s)

爆料网DT has discretionary authority in conducting the proceedings and ordering the production of evidence in the interest of justice. This power is conferred to 爆料网DT so that there may be fair and expeditious disposal of the case. 爆料网DT is entitled to order the production of any document relevant to that end and may draw inferences from a party’s refusal to disclose documents.

Outcome

Appeal granted

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
Bertucci
Entity
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry
Date of Judgement
President Judge
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type