2021-惇蹋厙AT-1161

惇蹋厙AT Held or 惇蹋厙DT Pronouncements

惇蹋厙AT held 惇蹋厙DT erred in law with regard to its finding that the second decision to renew the Appellant＊s fixed-term appointment superseded the first decision to renew his appointment (the challenged decision). Nevertheless, 惇蹋厙AT held that this finding was not dispositive of the appeal in the Appellant＊s favour, as his application was not receivable on the grounds of another basis of mootness. 惇蹋厙AT held that the contested decision to renew his fixed-term appointment by three months instead of two years did not constitute an appealable administrative decision for the simple reason that the decision advantaged him by adding, in total, three months to his last fixed-term appointment. 惇蹋厙AT held it was unnecessary to examine the other grounds of appeal advanced by Mr. Toson. On the question of whether the 惇蹋厙DT Judge should have recused herself from the hearing, 惇蹋厙AT held that it would not permit the issue to be raised for the first time on appeal, whilst stating that it did not find that the Judge in question had, or appeared to have a conflict of interest preventing her from independently and impartially adjudicating the case before her. 惇蹋厙AT dismissed the appeal and upheld the 惇蹋厙DT Judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

Mr. Toson contested the decision to renew his fixed-term appointment by three months instead of two years. 惇蹋厙DT found the application was not receivable.

Legal Principle(s)

An appealable administrative decision is a decision whereby its key characteristic is the capacity to produce direct legal consequences affecting a staff member＊s terms and conditions of appointment. When the contested administrative decision ceases to have any legal effect, the decision has been rendered moot and there is no longer a live issue upon which the 惇蹋厙DT or 惇蹋厙AT is competent to pass judgment. Just as a person may not bring a case about an already resolved controversy (res judicata), so too he or she should not be able to continue a case when the controversy is resolved during its pendency.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on merits

Outcome Extra Text

N/A

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 惇蹋厙DT Statute and Article 11(3) of the 惇蹋厙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

Asr Ahmed Toson

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement