2014-惇蹋厙AT-464

惇蹋厙AT Held or 惇蹋厙DT Pronouncements

惇蹋厙AT held that the Standing Committee did not err in holding the application was not receivable ratione temporis. 惇蹋厙AT noted that, in refusing to receive the application, the Standing Committee also implicitly refused to find ※good cause§ to waive the sixty days＊ time limit for review set forth in Section K of the 惇蹋厙JSPF Administrative Rules. 惇蹋厙AT also found no error in this implicit determination and held that a waiver of five years for review by the Standing Committee would be unreasonable, especially in light of the time limits in the Transfer Agreement between 惇蹋厙JSPF and CTBTO. 惇蹋厙AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 惇蹋厙JPSB decision.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision regarding the transfer of his pension rights from the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organisation (CTBTO) to 惇蹋厙JSPF. The Applicant＊s request was denied on the basis that 惇蹋厙JSPF, could not entertain the request to review a decision taken back in 2007. The Standing Committee (or 惇蹋厙JSPB) upheld the decision, holding that the Applicant＊s application to reopen and review his case could not be received ratione temporis, due to his failure to seek review on a timely basis.

Legal Principle(s)

惇蹋厙AT shall be competent to hear and pass judgment on an appeal of a decision of the Standing Committee acting on behalf of the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Board (惇蹋厙JSPB). A decision by the Standing Committee is a prerequisite to judicial review by 惇蹋厙AT. The Standing Committee＊s review of any decision by the Secretary of the 惇蹋厙JSPB shall be initiated within sixty days of notification of the decision appealed against, but upon good cause shown, the Standing Committee may agree to consider an appeal delivered after the expiry of the prescribed period.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on merits

Outcome Extra Text

No relief ordered; No relief ordered

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

Vorobiev

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement