惇蹋厙DT/2013/058

惇蹋厙AT Held or 惇蹋厙DT Pronouncements

The Applicant was denied eligibility for conversion because in 2006 she had a break in service of eight days, which interrupted the continuity of her service. The 惇蹋厙DT found that the main issue in the case was whether the break in service in 2006 can be taken into account for the purpose of conversion to a permanent appointment. The 惇蹋厙DT found that the break in service that took place in 2006 shall not be taken into account because the Applicant was induced into taking it, without proper legal basis, as a condition for her employment in New York. The 惇蹋厙DT ordered rescission of the decision declaring the Applicant ineligible to be considered for conversion. The 惇蹋厙DT ordered that the Applicant be given full and fair consideration for conversion to a permanent appointment. The 惇蹋厙DT awarded the Applicant USD7,000 as compensation for non-pecuniary harm (moral damages).

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant, a staff member of the United Nations Secretariat, contested the decision, conveyed to her in August 2011, that she was ineligible to be considered for a conversion of her fixed-term appointment to a permanent appointment.

Legal Principle(s)

Reasons for administrative decisions: Administrative decisions must be based on proper reasons and take into account proper facts and considerations.Relief, compensation: An applicant must substantiate the pecuniary and/or non-pecuniary damages that she or he claims to have suffered in consequence of the Administration＊s violation(s) of her or his rights. Where a person＊s rights have been infringed there is an entitlement to a remedy.

Outcome

Judgment entered for Applicant in full or in part

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 惇蹋厙DT Statute and Article 11(3) of the 惇蹋厙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

Kulawat

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement