2012-UNAT-223, Rawat

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

UNAT considered the appeal, in which the Secretary-General requested that UNAT consider the appeal receivable and find that UNDT exceeded its competence in ordering a suspension of action on the decision not to extend Mr Rawat’s appointment. UNAT noted that, in imminently executing the administrative order, UNDT failed to comply with the five-working-day limit, set forth in Villamoran (2011-UNAT-160), without giving any reasons for doing so and thus, clearly exceeded its competence. UNAT consequently held that the appeal against the contested order was receivable and founded. UNAT rescinded UNDT’s order.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

Mr Rawat requested a suspension of action regarding the decision not to extend his contract beyond 30 June 2011. UNDT ordered a suspension of the contested decision until 8 July 2011. On 8 July 2011 UNDT dismissed Mr. Rawat’s application seeking a suspension of action of the decision not to extend his contract.

Legal Principle(s)

Where execution of an administrative decision is imminent, through no fault or delay on the part of the applicant and takes place before the expiry of the five-day period provided for in Article 13 of the UNDT RoP, and if UNDT is not in a position to make a decision under Article 2(2) of its Statute, it must have the discretion to grant a suspension for those five days. To find otherwise would render Article 2(2) of the UNDT Statute and Article 13 of the UNAT RoP meaningless in cases where implementation of the administrative decision is imminent.

Outcome

Appeal granted

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 Judgment

Applicants/ Appellants

Rawat

Entity

ICTR

Case Number(s)

2011-236

Tribunal

UNAT

Registry Location :

New York