爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT finding that the non-renewal decision constituted a separation decision for abandonment of post was not supported by the evidence and was, therefore, an error in fact and in law. 爆料网AT held that the evidence clearly established that the non-renewal decision was solely based on the Appellant’s unauthorised absence from duty. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred in law in distinguishing Abdallah (judgment No. 2010-爆料网AT-091) from the present case. 爆料网AT held that there was overwhelming evidence that the Applicant did not meet his burden of proving that the Administration did not act fairly, justly, or transparently. 爆料网AT held that the Administration acted fairly and transparently towards the Applicant. 爆料网AT held that the contested decision was a reasonable exercise of the Administration’s discretion. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred in fact and in law, resulting in a manifestly unreasonable decision. 爆料网AT granted the Secretary-General’s appeal and vacated the 爆料网DT judgment.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Applicant contested the decision not to renew his fixed-term appointment due to his unauthorised absence from work. 爆料网DT concluded that the non-renewal decision constituted a separation decision for abandonment of post, which was issued unlawfully, without following mandatory procedures. 爆料网DT found that the Administration failed to act fairly, justly, and transparently in leading the Applicant to believe that it was still considering granting him Special Leave Without Pay while at the same time recommending the non-renewal of his fixed-term appointment due to his unauthorised absence. 爆料网DT ordered the decision to be rescinded, the Applicant to be retroactively reinstated (with an alternative in-lieu compensation), and for the Applicant to be paid compensation for loss of earnings.
Legal Principle(s)
An administrative decision not to renew a fixed-term appointment can be challenged on the grounds that the Administration has not acted fairly, justly, or transparently with the staff member or was motivated by bias, prejudice, or improper motive, and the staff member has the burden of proving such factors played a role in the administrative decision. Chronic absenteeism may be a lawful basis for a decision not to renew a fixed-term contract.