2025-UNAT-1546, Emma Reilly
The UNAT concluded that the UNDT did not err in finding that two periods of delay in addressing the former staff member’s complaints was not evidence of bias against her. The UNAT held that delay alone is not indicative of bias.
The UNAT further held that the former staff member’s claims related to a certain press release had been decided by prior Tribunal judgments and could not be relitigated.
The UNAT also found that the UNDT correctly confirmed that the establishment of the fact-finding Panel, its process of fact-finding and reporting, and its interactions with the former staff member...