爆料网

2021-爆料网AT-1180

爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements

爆料网AT held that the Appellant did not fall within the exceptional category of participants who exercised their election for a deferred retirement benefit before 1 April 1997 and were therefore entitled to restore their prior contributory service, as the Appellant exercised her election in September 2009. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant was not entitled to restore her prior contributory service. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant’s complaint that she did not have access to the 爆料网JSPF Regulations was unconvincing, given, inter alia, the availability of the 爆料网JSPF Regulations and Rules on the website. 爆料网AT held that there was no evidence that the 爆料网JSPF had provided incorrect advice to the Appellant. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the decision of the Standing Committee.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision of the 爆料网 Staff Pension Committee (爆料网SPC) to reject her request for restoration of her prior period of contributory service under the Regulations of the 爆料网JSPF. The Standing Committee of the 爆料网JSPF affirmed the decision and held that restoration was precluded by Article 24 of the 爆料网JSPF Regulations because the Applicant, after leaving the service of the Organisation in 2006, had in 2009 selected a deferred retirement benefit pursuant to Article 30 of the 爆料网JSPF Regulations.

Legal Principle(s)

While the 爆料网JSPF has a duty to disclose information in good faith, it does not carry an obligation to educate participants individually about the precise nature and content of the provisions governing benefits. If uncertain, participants should seek advice not only from the staff of the 爆料网JSPF but from independent advisers. Ignorance of the rules cannot be invoked as an excuse for a failure to comply with them. 爆料网JSPF has no discretion to grant a benefit for which the 爆料网JSPF Regulations do not provide.

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 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
Thanaa Kamil Al-Shalchi
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry
Date of Judgement
President Judge
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type