2015-惇蹋厙AT-531

惇蹋厙AT Held or 惇蹋厙DT Pronouncements

惇蹋厙AT considered seven motions submitted by Ms Rangel prior to a judgment on the merits. On the two Motions for Interim Relief, 惇蹋厙AT held that Ms Rangel did not seek an interim measure for temporary relief consistent with the pronouncements of the ICJ Conciliation Committee, but rather she sought interim relief in cases where the Committee had dismissed her applications. 惇蹋厙AT held that since one of the two cumulative conditions under Article 9(4) of the 惇蹋厙AT Statute was not fulfilled, it did not need to further consider the second condition. 惇蹋厙AT denied the requests for interim relief. On the Motion for Transmission of Important Information, 惇蹋厙AT dismissed the motion as Ms. Rangel failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances. On the Motion of Transmission of Information and her request for interim measures regarding her safety, 惇蹋厙AT held that since one of the two cumulative considerations under Article 9(4) of the 惇蹋厙AT Statute was not fulfilled, it did not need to further consider the second condition and dismissed the application. On the Motions for Confidentiality, 惇蹋厙AT held that there was no reason for a confidential filing of the documents in question and lifted the confidentiality of the document containing declarations of witnesses who testified to the 2 December 2014 incident. 惇蹋厙AT instructed the Registrar of 惇蹋厙AT to strike the document containing declarations of former staff members from the record. 惇蹋厙AT dismissed all seven motions under consideration.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

ICJ decision: Ms Rangel challenged a number of decisions, including the imposition of a disciplinary measure of separation from service with compensation in lieu of notice.

Legal Principle(s)

The granting of interim measures is subject to strict requirements. Interim measures for temporary relief must be consistent with the decision of the first instance body. The purpose of anonymity is to protect the privacy of victims of misconduct and also to ensure their safety.

Outcome

Appeal granted

Outcome Extra Text

Only financial compensation.

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

Rangel

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry