UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

It was not disputed that the Applicant borrowed money from a Sales Manager working in a company doing business with MONUC. In the light of the applicable law and in particular the financial and procurement rules, the Tribunal found that misconduct had been properly established. Nonetheless, the Tribunal found a certain number of mitigating factors such as the fact that he repaid the loan in full and that it was a “one-off decision”. Therefore, the Tribunal took the view that the sanction was not proportionate.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision to summarily dismiss him for serious misconduct based on findings that he had solicited, received and accepted sums of money from a vendor who did business with MONUC.

Legal Principle(s)

N/A

Outcome

Judgment entered for Applicant in full or in part

Outcome Extra Text

UNDT ordered recission of the decision or, as an alternative, compensation equivalent to all the benefits the Applicant would have been entitled to if he had been terminated instead of being summarily dismissed.

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

Parkes

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement