UNDT/2012/132

UNDT/2012/132, Jahnsen Lecca

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

Application for suspension of action pending management evaluation in disciplinary matters: It is clear from a plain reading of article 2.2 of the Tribunal’s Statute, article 13.1 of its Rules of Procedure and staff rule 11.2 that the two former provisions apply only where management evaluation is required. In the instant case, the contested decision is a disciplinary measure which can be challenged before the Tribunal without first seeking management evaluation. Thus, the Tribunal cannot rely on these provisions to order the requested suspension of action pending management evaluation. Interim measures in disciplinary matters: It follows from article 10.2 of the Tribunal’s Statute and staff rule 9.6 that, where a staff member files an application before the Tribunal to challenge an administrative decision, he/she may seek an interim order from the Tribunal suspending the implementation of the contested decision. However, such suspension is explicitly excluded in cases of termination. In this case, the contested decision is a measure of termination within the meaning of staff rule 9.6, and the Applicant has not filed an application to challenge the merits of this decision.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

By letter of 13 August 2012 which the Applicant received on 27 August 2012, she was notified of the decision of the Secretary-General to impose on her, with immediate effect, the disciplinary measure of separation from service with compensation in lieu of notice and with termination indemnity. Also on 27 August 2012 the Applicant requested the Tribunal to order suspension of action on this decision. The UNDT considered that neither articles 2.2 of the Tribunal’s Statute and 13.1 of its Rules of Procedure on the one hand, nor article 10.2 of the Statute on the other hand allowed for the granting of the suspension of action on the contested disciplinary measure in this case, and it accordingly rejected the application.

Legal Principle(s)

N/A

Outcome
Dismissed as not receivable

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
Jahnsen Lecca
Entity
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry
Date of Judgement
Duty Judge
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type