2017-��AT-711

��AT Held or ��DT Pronouncements

��AT held that the appellant did not identify the alleged defects in the judgment and state the grounds relied upon in asserting that the judgment was defective. ��AT held that the Appellant merely reiterated allegations already thoroughly examined by ��DT. ��AT held that the Appellant failed to demonstrate any error in the ��DT findings such as to warrant its reversal. ��AT held that there was no merit in the appeal. ��AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the ��DT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested his non-selection for a position. ��DT rejected the application.

Legal Principle(s)

The appeals procedure is of a corrective nature and not an opportunity for a dissatisfied party to reargue his or her case. The appellant has the burden of satisfying ��AT that the judgment he or she seeks to challenge is defective, and it follows that the appellant must identify the alleged defect in the judgment and state the grounds relied upon in asserting that the judgment is defective.

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 ��DT Statute and Article 11(3) of the ��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

Krioutchkov

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement