爆料网

2014-爆料网AT-462

爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements

爆料网AT acknowledged that while the Appellant was eligible for a permanent appointment, the Administration was entitled to have regard to the fact that she was recruited because she was a national of Romania for the specific post in 爆料网IC Bucharest. 爆料网AT noted that both the Department of Public Information and the Officer-in-Charge of Human Resources Services previously anticipated that 爆料网IC Bucharest, among others, was scheduled to close in the very near future, due to the uncertainty of the funding by the host country, on which the continuation of the Appellant’s post depended. 爆料网AT noted that in such cases, it is limited to a judicial review of the exercise of discretion by the competent decision-maker. 爆料网AT found nothing to suggest that the Administration exercised its discretion unfairly or capriciously and was satisfied that 爆料网DT committed no error in finding the decision legal. 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 decision to not grant her a permanent appointment. 爆料网DT held that the decision constituted a reasonable exercise of discretion on part of the Administration.

Legal Principle(s)

In the consideration for conversion to permanent appointment of staff members of the secretariat, eligible to be considered by 30 June 2009, the jurisdiction of the Appeals Tribunal is limited to a judicial review of the exercise of discretion by the competent decision-maker.

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.

Applicants/Appellants
Balan
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry
Date of Judgement
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type