2020-��AT-1017

��AT Held or ��DT Pronouncements

As a preliminary matter, ��AT held that ��RWA DT exercised its discretion in consolidating the cases lawfully and appropriately. ��AT held the impugned decision was taken in good faith and on a reasonable basis. ��AT held that there was a bona fide reason to restructure and that it was operationally rational not to renew certain fixed-term appointments on a full-time basis but to reclassify them to part-time appointments. ��AT held that the Appellants�� claim that their acquired rights were violated was without merit. ��AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the ��RWA DT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

��RWA DT consolidated a number of cases in which the staff members contested the decision not to renew their fixed-term appointments on a full-time basis due to lack of funding and to offer them new appointments on a part-time basis instead. ��RWA DT held that all the applications (except two) 2020-were receivable, but the applications were dismissed on the merits. ��RWA DT held that the contested decision was lawful, reasonable, and did not violate the staff members�� acquired rights.

Legal Principle(s)

The overriding consideration on the consolidation of cases is convenience, expedience and judicial economy. Fixed-term appointments carry no expectation of renewal or conversion to another type of appointment. If an exercise of discretion by ��RWA is legal, rational, procedurally correct and proportional, there will be no basis for interference by ��AT.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on merits

Outcome Extra Text

No relief ordered; No relief ordered.

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

Salhi et al

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement