��DT/2013/034

��AT Held or ��DT Pronouncements

It is not disputed by either party that the Applicant was not employed by the Organization during the one week period between the curtailment, requested by himself, of his employment with ��ECA and his appointment at ��HQ. Furthermore, the Applicant ��does not seek to challenge the 2005 decision creating the break in service, but, [in light of the Tribunal��s decision in Gomez], the later decision not to consider him eligible for conversion to permanent appointment on the basis of that earlier decision��. The Tribunal finds that the Applicant was ineligible for consideration for conversion to permanent appointment as the break in service resulted in him not having acquired five years of continuous service on a fixed-term appointment. he Applicant requests that he be considered for conversion to a permanent appointment or that his contract ��be converted to a continuing contract��. The ��DT found that the decision that the Applicant was not eligible for consideration for conversion to a permanent appointment was lawful.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contests the decision finding him ineligible for consideration for conversion to a permanent appointment due one week break in service in 2005 which resulted in him not having acquired five years of continuous service on fixed-term appointments. T

Legal Principle(s)

N/A

Outcome

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

Dunda

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement