The UNAT found that the present motion was distinguishable from a typical motion for withdrawal of an appeal: the non-moving party objects to the withdrawal as a revised appeal would enable the Secretary-General to address arguments included in the answer and, second, the Secretary-General still deems it necessary to pursue an appeal. The UNAT held that its reiteration in a recent case that appeals on the merits and relief should be considered together had not been new and was an insufficient basis on which to request the filing of a revised appeal. The UNAT found, however, that when the UNDT had issued separate judgments on liability and relief, the UNAT appreciated a party’s concern for preserving rights to appeal a judgment. The UNAT denied the motion for leave to file a revised appeal and decided that the motion to withdraw the first appeal was moot.