爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General of the Compensation Case, an appeal by Mr Shkurtaj of the Ethics Policy Case, and a cross-appeal by Mr Shkurtaj of the Compensation Case. 爆料网AT held that a former staff member has standing to contest an administrative decision concerning him or her if the facts giving rise to his or her complaint arose from his or her employment and that there must be sufficient nexus between the former employment and the impugned action. 爆料网AT held that an award for damages was justified in the circumstances. 爆料网AT held that the amount of fourteen months’ net base salary, as recommended by the Ethics Office and ordered by 爆料网DT, was excessive and reduced this to six months. 爆料网AT affirmed the award of USD 5,000 for the Administration’s substantial delay. 爆料网AT affirmed 爆料网DT’s finding that there had been no retaliation. 爆料网AT dismissed Mr Shkurtaj’s appeal, granted the Secretary-General’s appeal in part, and dismissed Mr Shkurtaj’s cross-appeal. 爆料网AT affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment, except insofar as the fourteen months’ compensation was reduced to six months’ compensation.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
In the context of an alleged retaliation case, the Applicant contested the decision not to pay him fourteen months’ net base salary as recommended by the Director of the Ethics Office (Compensation Case) and the refusal by the Administration to apply the Secretary-General’s Bulletin on retaliation (Ethics Policy Case). 爆料网DT held that the Applicant had standing in both cases. On the merits, 爆料网DT found for the Applicant in the Compensation Case, awarding an additional USD 5,000 for the Administration’s failure to consider in a timely manner, act on, or communicate the Ethics Office’s findings and recommendations to the Applicant. On the merits, 爆料网DT dismissed the Ethics Policy Case.
Legal Principle(s)
A former staff member has standing to contest an administrative decision concerning him or her if the facts giving rise to his or her complaint arose or flowed from his or her employment; there must be sufficient nexus between the former employment and the impugned action. Damages awarded for violation of due process rights are not exemplary or punitive but must be awarded with care and be of a reasonable amount.