爆料网

2013-爆料网AT-313

爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements

爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT correctly determined that no appealable administrative decision was identified by the Appellant. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT correctly assessed the actions and/or omissions against the definition of an administrative decision. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT was correct in law when it stated that the Administration’s proposed alternative did not qualify as a final decision, nor could it be considered as a decision not to proceed with the rebuttal process. 爆料网AT held that there was nothing in the Appellant’s written or oral submissions to persuade 爆料网AT that 爆料网DT made any error of law or fact in rejecting the application as premature. 爆料网AT held that there was no legitimacy in the Appellant raising the merits of the case with 爆料网AT as this had been adjudicated in an earlier judgment. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal against the 爆料网DT’s decision to reject the Appellant’s application as premature. 爆料网AT rejected the Appellant’s submission that 爆料网DT had no legal basis to proceed by way of summary judgment. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT correctly determined that the criterion for a summary judgment was met upon determination that the facts were clear and the only issue remaining, whether the contested decision was capable of being appealed, was a matter of law. 爆料网AT dismissed the Appellant’s proposition that the 爆料网DT decision to proceed by way of summary judgment offended the principle of audi alteram partem on the basis that his application was given due consideration by 爆料网DT. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the options available to him in order to establish a rebuttal panel to rebut for his performance appraisal. 爆料网DT rejected his application in a summary judgment as not receivable for failure to identify an appealable decision.

Legal Principle(s)

爆料网DT is competent to hear and pass judgment on an application appealing an administrative decision that is alleged to be in non-compliance with the terms of appointment or the contract of employment.

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 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.