2024-��AT-1432

��AT Held or ��DT Pronouncements

The Appeals Tribunal found that the ��DT correctly dismissed Mr. Salon��s application as not receivable on grounds that he had failed to establish that an appealable administrative decision had been taken by the Organization and that in any event, he had failed to request management evaluation.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

Before the ��DT, Mr. Salon, a former staff member, made claims of sustained and serious mistreatment during his employment with OIOS.

By Judgment No. ��DT/2023/029, the ��DT dismissed the application as not receivable. The ��DT concluded that Mr. Salon had not established the making of an administrative decision by the Secretary-General; and in any event, Mr. Salon had not ever sought management evaluation of an administrative decision.

Mr. Salon filed an appeal.

Legal Principle(s)

The ��DT's power to issue a summary judgment is based statutorily on the absence of any dispute about the material facts of a case, i.e. a manifest absence of contested jurisdictional or foundational facts.

Management evaluation of an impugned administrative decision is a process of internal review by the United Nations although independent of the decision-maker and the department in which the complainant staff member was engaged. The MEU was established separately for this purpose and to ensure this degree of independence from administrative decision-makers.

Submission of a request for management evaluation to the MEU is a mandatory first step in the appeal process. Without such a request and either a decision thereon or a failure to decide the request within the statutory period for doing so, a complaint cannot be taken to the ��DT. Those rules are well-established and well-publicised in the Organization��s Staff Regulations and Rules which staff is reasonably expected, if not to know, then at least to check. It is a fundamental obligation of staff to be familiar with, or at least familiar with how to access, relevant rules and procedures.

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 ��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

Fernando Salon

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement