2019-UNAT-937

2019-UNAT-937, Alhawi

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

UNAT held that while the UNRWA DT decision could have had an indirect impact on the Appellant’s terms of appointment or contract, a direct effect is needed in order to allow a staff member to contest an adverse administrative decision. UNAT held that the fact that UNRWA granted the change of modality of contract to the other individual did not have any bearing on the outcome of the UNRWA DT decision, because the application was dismissed on receivability grounds. UNAT held that UNRWA DT did not err in any of its factual findings resulting in a manifestly unreasonable decision. UNAT held that UNRWA DT did not err in its legal conclusion that the administrative decision of UNRWA to change the modality of the contract of a third party was a discretionary one, having no direct impact on the Appellant’s terms of appointment or contract, and thus led to the finding that the application was not receivable. UNAT dismissed the appeal and upheld the UNRWA DT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

UNRWA DT judgment: The Applicant contested the decision to grant an Individual Service Provider contract for the position of Assistant Professor English Literature and Linguistics to an individual who had been employed on a limited-duration contract as an Assistant Professor – English Language. The Appellant was serving against the post of Assistant Professor English Literature and Linguistics on an acting basis and applied as soon as the vacancy was announced; however, after having gone through the recruitment process, he was made the second priority candidate for the post. UNRWA DT found that the decision not to advertise the post, but rather to hire another individual for the post, was a discretionary decision, which did not have any direct consequence for the Applicant’s terms of appointment of contract. UNRWA DT ultimately held that the Applicant’s expectation that a post, for which he wanted to apply, would become vacant did not give him legal standing to contest the decision. UNRWA DT held that the application was not receivable.

Legal Principle(s)

UNAT is not an instance for a party to reargue a case without identifying the defects and demonstrating on which grounds an impugned first instance tribunal judgment is erroneous.

Outcome
Appeal 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 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.

Applicants/Appellants
Alhawi
Entity
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry
Date of Judgement
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type
Applicable Law