爆料网

2021-爆料网AT-1164

爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements

爆料网AT considered an appeal by Mr. Rugerinyange. 爆料网AT noted that Mr. Rugerinyange sought to challenge an administrative decision directly affecting the terms of his new contract as an individual contractor. Therefore, even if the administrative decision of placing him on administrative leave with pay referred to facts which had occurred while he was still a staff member, as he claimed, it affected the new contract and his new capacity as an independent contractor. As such, he had no legal standing before the 爆料网DT. Accordingly, 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网DT Order.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

In Order No. 198 (NBI/2020), the 爆料网DT dismissed Mr. Rugerinyange’s application for suspension of action pending management evaluation against the Secretary-General’s decision to place him on administrative leave with pay during an investigation for possible misconduct. While the 爆料网DT acknowledged that Mr. Rugerinyange had previously been a staff member, the 爆料网DT found that the provisions of Article 3(1)(b) of the 爆料网DT Statute did not apply to the present case, since the issue under consideration did not derive from possible violations of his terms of appointment, but rather from the Secretary-General’s decision to place him on administrative leave with pay when his status was no longer that of a staff member, but rather that of an individual contractor. The 爆料网DT held that Mr. Rugerinyange’s application for suspension of action was not receivable ratione personae and dismissed it in its entirety.

Legal Principle(s)

Individual contractors do not have standing before the 爆料网DT. A former staff member has standing before the 爆料网DT only with respect to administrative decisions that affect his or her terms of appointment of his or her former appointment.

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 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
Nshuti Rugerinyange
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry
Date of Judgement
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type