爆料网

2016-爆料网AT-698

爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements

爆料网AT considered the Secretary-General’s appeal, which was limited to a challenge of 爆料网DT’s method of calculating the compensation awarded to Mr Nyasulu as an alternative to the rescission. 爆料网AT noted that Mr Nyasulu presumably had no objection to the compensation being re-calculated, as he did not rebut the appeal. 爆料网AT found that it had no option but to remand the case as, in order to rule on the Secretary-General’s request, it would first need to be satisfied that 爆料网DT’s calculation of compensation in lieu of rescission was not correct. 爆料网AT held that that could not be done because 爆料网DT gave no reasons for applying the impugned exchange rate. 爆料网AT remanded 爆料网DT’s judgment to state the reasons, facts, and law on which its method of calculation the compensation in lieu of recission was based.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

Mr Nyasulu contested the decision not to renew his appointment and the decision to require him to go through a competitive recruitment process for the position of Principal Rule of Law Officer, United Nations Mission in Liberia (爆料网MIL) at the D-1 level. 爆料网DT ordered rescission of the contested decision and reinstatement of the Applicant and his deployment to the next similar position as at the time of his separation. In the alternative, 爆料网DT ordered one-year compensation as follows: (a) four months’ net base salary for the period that Mr Nyasulu was not working, and (b) the “difference in pay for eight months between his last salary (a total of approximately USD 139,559) and his salary as a Special Prosecutor in Malawi (total of approx. USD 65,000)”. 爆料网DT also awarded Mr Nyasulu compensation for the “substantive and procedural irregularities occasioned to him by the failure of 爆料网MIL Administration to conduct a comparative review to determine his suitability for reassignment to a new position” in the amounts of (a) one month’s net base salary as compensation for the substantive irregularity and (b) one month’s net base salary for the procedural irregularities.

Legal Principle(s)

The judgments of the Dispute Tribunal shall be issued in writing and shall state the reasons, facts, and law on which they are based.

Outcome

Appeal granted

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.

Applicants/Appellants
Nyasulu
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry
Date of Judgement
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type
Categories/Subcategories