��DT/2020/142

��AT Held or ��DT Pronouncements

The legal issue for determination in the present case is whether ��OPS was under an obligation to extend a fixed-term appointment for the sole purpose of allowing a staff member to utilize his or her sick leave entitlement. The answer is negative, as the Tribunal found that there was no evidence in the case file to conclude that the legal framework of ��OPS included such obligation. Neither Staff rule 6.2(a) nor ��OPS Operational Directive OD.PCG.2017.01 on Human Resources, Ethics and Culture (in effect as of 15 August 2017) contain any obligation for the Administration to extend a staff member��s appointment for the sole purpose of enabling him or her to utilize his or her sick leave entitlement. Even assuming that the information given to the Applicant by a ��OPS Manager could amount to a promise of extension of his fixed-term appointment during the duration of his sick leave, the Tribunal found that ��OPS cannot abide by an act that is outside the remit of its own policies.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contests the decision not to extend his appointment and not to pay him his salary and other emoluments from 1 January 2018 to 1 March 2018 while he was on service-incurred certified sick leave.

Legal Principle(s)

Fixed-term appointments do not carry any expectancy, legal or otherwise, of renewal or conversion, irrespective of the length of service, and shall expire automatically and without prior notice on the expiration date specified in the letter of appointment.

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

Williams

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement