2011-惇蹋厙AT-181

惇蹋厙AT Held or 惇蹋厙DT Pronouncements

惇蹋厙AT held that the Appellant failed to establish that the 惇蹋厙DP decision to contact the Pakistani Government directly to enquire about its deputation policy was improperly motivated. With regard to the new communication upon which the Appellant wished to rely, 惇蹋厙AT held that it was new evidence, for which leave was required, in order to adduce it before 惇蹋厙AT. 惇蹋厙AT did not find any exceptional circumstances existed to require it to consider the new evidence. 惇蹋厙AT held that 惇蹋厙DT did not err in taking into consideration the conditions governing the Appellant＊s deputation in order to determine his probable period of appointment with 惇蹋厙DP. 惇蹋厙AT held that 惇蹋厙DT correctly determined that it would not be appropriate to order the Appellant＊s reinstatement. 惇蹋厙AT held that 惇蹋厙DT correctly assessed the compensation for pecuniary damages and declined to enhance the compensation. 惇蹋厙AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 惇蹋厙DT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision not to renew his contract. 惇蹋厙DT found that the Secretary-General was in breach of his contractual obligations towards the Applicant (judgment No. 惇蹋厙DT/2010/114) and awarded compensation (judgment No. 惇蹋厙DT/2010/200).

Legal Principle(s)

Exceptional circumstances are required for 惇蹋厙AT to consider additional evidence that was not previously before 惇蹋厙DT.

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 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

Alauddin

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement