UNDT/2024/074

UNDT/2024/074, Ahouissou

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The Tribunal held:

a. Any postponement in issuing the Applicant's separation information to the Pension Fund could be justified only to a reasonable timeframe; the indefinite protraction of an investigation would violate a staff member’s contractual rights to have his final entitlement paid and also the right to a timely definition of any eventual disciplinary process against him/her.

b. The prolonged duration of the investigation did not warrant the withholding of the Applicant's final payment and pension for such a long time, considering the ordinary function for the said entitlements in providing a living.

c. The withholding of the pension release form and final entitlements was unlawful at the time of the Applicant's separation because this was not supported by any assessment of his debt and remained unlawful at the time because the Applicant had not even been charged of any specific accusation.

d. UNDP’s decision to defer the issuance of the Applicant’s final entitlements and Separation Notification Form to the UNJSPF was unlawful.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant challenged the Administration’s decision to delay the issuance of his personnel payroll clearance action form to the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund (“UNJSPF”), which resulted in holding his entitlements after separation from the Organization on the basis that he was under investigation.

Legal Principle(s)

When judging the validity of the exercise of discretion in administrative matters, the UNDT determines if the decision is legal, reasonable, and procedurally fair.

it is not the UNDT’s role to consider the correctness of the choice made by the Administrator amongst the various courses of action open to him. Nor is it the role of the Tribunal to substitute its own decision for that of the Administrator.

Outcome
Judgment entered for Applicant in full or in part

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
Ahouissou
Entity
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry
Date of Judgement
Duty Judge
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type
Categories/Subcategories