2022-��AT-1238

��AT Held or ��DT Pronouncements

The ��AT held that the ��DT erred with respect to the period for which the staff member was entitled to an SPA. The ��DT found that the requirements for an SPA had been met for the period 1 August 2015 to 31 January 2018, but due to the timing of his request in December 2018, he was entitled to payment only starting 21 December 2017. The ��AT agreed with the Secretary-General��s argument that even this payment was in error, because the staff member��s claim to the SPA was made several years after the entitlement to the initial payment came into play in August 2015. The ��AT held that the staff member��s claim for an SPA was time-barred because he did not raise it within one year following the date on which he would have (allegedly) been entitled to the initial payment. The ��AT further rejected the staff member��s claim to compensation for moral damage.

The Secretary-General's appeal was granted; Mr. Franco's appeal dismissed, and the ��DT Judgment reversed.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

In Judgment No. ��DT/2021/054, the ��DT granted the staff member��s application and ordered the Administration to pay him a Special Post Allowance (SPA) for performing higher-level functions for a certain period.

The Secretary-General and the staff member each appealed.

Legal Principle(s)

In terms of retroactive payments, Staff Rule 3.17(ii) provides that a staff member who has not been receiving an allowance, grant or other payment to which he or she is entitled shall not receive retroactively such allowance, grant or payment unless the staff member has made a written claim within one year following the date on which the staff member would have been entitled to the initial payment.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on merits; Appeal granted

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

Carmelo Franco

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement