UNDT/2015/034

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

After completing his application, at the Tribunal’s request, the Applicant did not respond to 2 orders and 2 notifications from the Tribunal requesting him to submit his comments, if any, on the issue of receivability of the application raised by the Respondent in his reply. Given this, the Tribunal concluded that the Applicant was no longer interested in the outcome of legal proceedings he instituted and that the case should be closed for abandonment of proceedings.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant, a former staff member of the Department of Safety and Security, United Nations Office in Vienna, contested the Secretary-General’s decision dated 22 July 2013 to dismiss him from service under staff rule 10.2(a)(ix).

Legal Principle(s)

Right to institute legal proceedings: the right to institute legal proceedings is a general principle of procedural law predicated upon the condition that the person using it has a legitimate interest in initiating and maintaining legal action. Access to the court has to be denied to those who are not in need of judicial remedy, as well as to those who are obviously no longer interested in the proceedings they instituted. Reopening of an application closed for abandonment of proceedings: The Tribunal will only consider reopening an application closed for abandonment of proceedings upon receipt of a motion to reinstate from a party providing the grounds for his failure to act, reasonably showing that failure to respond to the Tribunal`s orders was not intentional or the result of conscious indifference, and submitting evidence that it is the interests of justice to reinstate the proceedings.

Outcome

Dismissed for want of prosecution/abandonment

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.

Zhang-Osmancevic