2015-惇蹋厙AT-502

惇蹋厙AT Held or 惇蹋厙DT Pronouncements

惇蹋厙AT held that, in protesting against the non-inclusion of his Transitional Personal Allowance in his retirement benefit, the Appellant had failed to appreciate the distinction between an allowance and base salary. 惇蹋厙AT held that 惇蹋厙RWA DT correctly found that under the applicable Staff Rules, the Appellant＊s retirement benefit did not include the Transitional Personal Allowance. 惇蹋厙AT found no error in the 惇蹋厙RWA DT＊s finding that the Appellant had not submitted a timely request for decision review with respect to his allegation of impropriety of his transfer and that therefore that claim was not receivable. 惇蹋厙AT held that the issue of unjust treatment in his job applications had not been raised before 惇蹋厙RWA DT and could not be introduced for the first time on appeal, and, as such, was not receivable. 惇蹋厙AT held that the Appellant failed to establish that 惇蹋厙RWA DT fell into any error of law or fact in arriving at its decision and thus his appeal has no merit and could not succeed. 惇蹋厙AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 惇蹋厙RWA DT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision not to include the Transitional Personal Allowance in his retirement benefit following a transfer. 惇蹋厙RWA DT dismissed the application.

Legal Principle(s)

A party cannot merely repeat on appeal arguments that did not succeed in the lower court, rather, he or she must demonstrate that the court below has committed an error of fact or law warranting intervention by 惇蹋厙AT.

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

Khashan

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement