UNDT/2021/050, Amoussouga-Gero
UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements
The Applicant’s appointment rested with the Human Resources Section and not the DMS, the mere recommendation by the latter of extension of the contract did not constitute a firm commitment for the Organization under the applicable jurisprudence, nor did the extension of his ground pass, which is a mere organizational permission. Therefore, the Tribunal finds that the Applicant did not have a legitimate expectation of renewal of his fixed-term appointment. The Applicant’s post was among those whose unique function was to be abolished in the affected unit and therefore, deemed to be a “dry cut”. As the Applicant was the only D-1 in the concerned office, there was no requirement for the Administration to conduct a comparative review.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
Non-renewal of the Applicant’s fixed-term appointment.
Legal Principle(s)
A fixed-term appointment does not carry any expectancy, legal or otherwise, of renewal. A legitimate expectation of the renewal of an appointment of limited duration must be based on a firm commitment, expressed in writing.