爆料网

2015-爆料网AT-597

爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements

爆料网AT considered the Appellant’s claim that 爆料网DT erred in procedure in the following ways: firstly, by denying his request to call a specific witness; secondly, by making allegedly conclusory remarks at the oral hearing; and, thirdly, by refusing to admit further evidence on discrimination and retaliation committed against him in 2014. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not commit any error of procedure so as to affect the outcome of the present case. 爆料网AT noted that case management issues, including the question of whether to call a certain person to testify, remain within the discretion of 爆料网DT and do not merit a reversal except in clear cases of denial of due process of law affecting the right to produce evidence. 爆料网AT held that there was no error in the manner in which 爆料网DT exercised its discretion and that it was not persuaded that 爆料网DT had committed any error in procedure in declining to call the witness. 爆料网AT held that, having reviewed the oral recording of the hearing, it was satisfied that 爆料网DT did not make improper or prejudicial comments or reach premature conclusions. Noting that the evidence 爆料网DT refused to admit related to events that arose after the contested decision, 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not err in not taking it into account in assessing the correctness of the decision under its review. With respect to the merits of the case, 爆料网AT held that the Appellant had not persuaded it that the judgment under appeal was affected by any error in law or fact such as to warrant its reversal. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant’s contention that 爆料网DT failed to address his claim that the Administration’s email, which indicated only a limited workload, was undermined by the recruitment of six freelancers the same month was misplaced and 爆料网AT held that there was no error in the 爆料网DT’s reasoning on this issue. 爆料网AT held that it was not material to the outcome of the case whether the impugned decision could be said to be tainted by bias or discrimination, as the Appellant had no right to be granted more days of work or any legitimate expectation of being granted more assignments. 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 not to renew his contract. 爆料网DT dismissed the application.

Legal Principle(s)

爆料网AT will not interfere lightly with the broad discretion of 爆料网DT in the management of its cases.

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.