002 (NBI/2024)

View PDF

002 (NBI/2024), Francis Fultang

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

1. The Tribunal noted that the Applicant had previously raised the same issue before both the Dispute Tribunal (Fultang UNDT/2022/102) and the Appeals Tribunal (Fultang UNAT-2023-1403). The Dispute Tribunal had found the documents in question admissible. The Appeals Tribunal affirmed this finding.

2. The Tribunal, therefore, held that since the issue had been fully litigated by the parties previously, it was subject to the doctrine of res judicata. Thus, the subject documents were deemed admissible in the proceedings.

3. The Tribunal further concluded that even if the issue had not previously been adjudicated, the documents would still be deemed non-privileged and admissible because no privilege attaches to communications with MEU. The MEU is part of the Administration and the management evaluation process is an administrative review of administrative decisions. As such it is not akin to a mediation or settlement process to which some privileges attach.

4. Accordingly, the Tribunal decided that the receipts in question were admissible and the Applicant’s objection to those receipts was overruled.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the admissibility of receipts produced in the course of discussions before the Management Evaluation Unit (MEU).

Legal Principle(s)

1. Pursuant to the settled jurisprudence, a matter that has been fully litigated by the parties previously is subject to the doctrine of res judicata.

2. No privilege attaches to communications with the Management Evaluation Unit.

Outcome
Other motion denied
Outcome Extra Text

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 UNDT Statute and Article 11(3) of the UNAT 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.

Full order
Individual Party
Francis Fultang
Entity
UNISFA
Case Number(s)
UNDT/NBI/2023/010
Tribunal
UNDT
Registry
Nairobi
Date of Order
Duty Judge
Wallace
Language of Order
English
Issuance Type
Order
Categories/Subcategories
Other
Applicable Law
UNDT RoP