爆料网

2013-爆料网AT-330

爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements

爆料网AT considered two appeals, one against Order No. 103 (NBI/2012) and one against judgment No. 爆料网DT/2012/116. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant had not established any excess of jurisdiction or competence on the part of 爆料网DT; rather, his claims addressed the merits of the 爆料网DT decision. 爆料网AT noted that even if the 爆料网DT had erred in law or fact and as also alleged in the case, committed an error of procedure, this did not instance any excess of jurisdiction or competence on its part such as would entitle the Appellant to bypass the exception to the right to appeal set out in Article 2(2) of the 爆料网DT Statute. 爆料网AT held that the appeals were not receivable. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeals.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

爆料网DT order and judgment: In the context of a dispute over the appointment of another individual to a post for which he had applied, the Applicant submitted a request for a suspension of action. In Order No. 103 (NBI/2012), 爆料网DT rejected the request. In judgment No. 爆料网DT/2012/116, 爆料网DT set out the reasons as to why the request for suspension of action had not been granted.

Legal Principle(s)

Appeals from the 爆料网DT on suspension of action decisions will be receivable only if 爆料网DT, in adjudicating on such applications, exceeded its competence or jurisdiction.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on receivability

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.