UNDT/2025/045, Dorah Likukela

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The Tribunal held:

a. Some of the contested decisions were manifestly irreceivable as already determined by the Tribunal in Likukela Order No. 161 (NBI/2024) and Likukela UNDT/2025/006. These matters would not be considered again by the Tribunal in accordance with the doctrine of res judicata.

b. The claims regarding the alleged theft of the Applicant's wages, lack of a legal basis for recovery of her final pay and illegally withholding her final pay were not receivable ratione materiae for failure to file a timely request for management evaluation.

c. The claim alleging prevention of the payment of the Applicant's pension was not receivable because it is moot.

d. The remainder of the Applicant’s claims were not receivable as they were beyond the competence of the Dispute Tribunal.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant filed an application on 11 May 2025 contesting several administrative decisions which she described as follows:

a. Theft of her wages in the sum of USD47,224.62 which was paid to the United Nations Federal Credit Union (“UNFCU”);

b. Prevention of payment of her United Nations Pension in the sum of USD223,725.00;

c. Lack of a legal basis for the recovery of her final pay and concealment of the act, until queried;

d. Illegally withholding of her final pay as a violation of human dignity,

e. Risking her USD45,000 worth of belongings in Kinshasa, to tear, wear, loss and theft; and accumulation of storage charges;

f. Criminal trespass on her house in Lusaka, Zambia on 23 February 2024, and vandalism and looting of all her belongings and evidence in the illegal civil suits inflicted on her; and

g. Validation of an “illegally obtained Res Judicata, 13 July 2022 Zambian Judgment in cause 2014/HPC/0057; and delegitimization of the legitimate and binding mandatory and Final Default Judgment, [she] won in the sum of USD110 million against UNFCU and Zambia, without jurisdiction”.

Legal Principle(s)

In accordance with art. 8.3 of the UNDT statute, “[t]he Dispute Tribunal shall not suspend or waive the
deadlines for management evaluation."

The Dispute Tribunal has no authority to waive immunities or to refer a matter to the General Assembly and
the Security Council for a legal advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice.

Outcome

Dismissed as not receivable

Outcome Extra Text

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.

Full judgment

Applicants/Appellants

Dorah Likukela

Entity

MONUSCO

Case Number(s)

UNDT/NBI/2025/039

Tribunal

UNDT

Registry

Nairobi