爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not err in fact or in law in finding that the Appellant did not request management evaluation of the disputed decision and that his application was therefore not receivable. 爆料网AT agreed with 爆料网DT that the Appellant did not have standing to challenge a decision affecting his right to consultation as a staff representative. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant had failed to demonstrate any error of law or fact committed by 爆料网DT in arriving at its judgment that his application was not receivable regarding the fact that the contested decision had no direct legal consequences affecting him. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant did not manifestly abuse the proceedings merely by proceeding with his application and set aside the order for costs against him. 爆料网AT upheld in part the appeal to vacate 爆料网DT’s order for costs against the staff member and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment’s finding regarding the non-receivability of the application.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Applicant contested the decision by the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund (爆料网JSPF) to submit budget estimates for the 2016-2017 biennium to the 爆料网JSPF Board on 2 June 2015, without engaging in consultation with staff representatives. 爆料网DT rejected the application on the following grounds: The Applicant failed to request management evaluation of the contested decision; the Applicant did not have standing to challenge a decision affecting his rights as a staff representative; the contested decision did not have direct legal consequences affecting the Applicant. 爆料网DT ordered costs against the Applicant for abuse of proceedings.
Legal Principle(s)
There is no statutory provision or other law which gives 爆料网DT jurisdiction to entertain an application by a staff representative on behalf of staff members. The only recognition given to a staff association in the 爆料网DT Statute is in Article 2. 3, which gives 爆料网DT discretion to permit or deny leave to an application to file a friend-of-the-court (amicus curiae) brief by a staff association. However, one of the essential characteristics of a friend-of-the-court is that he or she is not a party to the case. As held by this Tribunal in Lee (judgment No. 2014-爆料网AT-481), the key characteristic of an administrative decision subject to judicial review is that the decision must produce direct legal consequences affecting a staff member’s terms and conditions of appointment. That is to say, the administrative decision must have a direct impact on the terms of appointment or contract of employment of the individual staff member.