Recherce

The staff member based in Geneva applied for the post in Suva, Fiji, and was offered the temporary appointment as a result. After many rounds of communications regarding the date of reporting for duty, the Administration informed him that his suggested date was not acceptable, and it was proceeding to contact the next candidate.

The UNAT noted that the offer of appointment had specified that it was “for an initial period effective as soon as possible to 31 December 2024”. The UNAT found that by unconditionally accepting the offer of appointment, the staff member was in a quasi-contractual...

The former staff member was placed on Administrative Leave Without Pay (ALWOP) pending the conclusion of an investigation into him for misconduct. At the time that the decision-maker considered extending the ALWOP period, only a Draft Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) Report was available.

The UNAT held that the UNDT erroneously and definitively substituted its own determination of the facts for that of the Administration. It erroneously admitted after-the-fact independent forensic reports as relevant to the reliability of the evidence cited by OIOS, when these reports were not...

The staff member submitted a claim for compensation for an injury attributable to the performance of official duties. The Advisory Board on Compensation Claims found her claim time-barred. She requested the Advisory Board to reconsider her claim and attached a new claim form, which stated a new date of the injury. She subsequently filed many claims and requests for reviews of alleged decisions and “non decisions” concerning the processing of her claim.

The UNAT noted that it had rendered its prior Judgment in which it held that the staff member’s application challenging alleged decisions and...

On 19 May 2024, the staff member returned to his duty station from Rest and Recuperation (R&R). The period of qualifying service for the R&R entitlement was 28 days and he was eligible for another R&R from 16 June 2024. He left the duty station on 13 June 2024. He requested R&R for 23-27 June 2024.

The UNAT noted that the staff member had left the duty station with the expectation that the following days of 14-22 June 2024, which constituted a combination of non-working days, United Nations Official holidays, and annual leave, would not interrupt or suspend, but contribute to his qualifying...

The staff member, who was serving in Khartoum, was evacuated when civil war erupted in Sudan. He submitted a claim for compensation for loss of personal effects attributable to service.

The UNAT held that by denying the staff member’s request for referral to mediation the UNDT had lawfully exercised its case management discretion and had not committed an error of procedure.

The UNAT found that the UNDT had not erred when it identified the staff member’s argument as a challenge to the policy of the Organization but had erred when it held that it did not have jurisdiction to incidentally examine...

The staff member, who was serving in Khartoum, was evacuated when civil war erupted in Sudan. She submitted a claim for compensation for loss of personal effects attributable to service.

The UNAT held that the UNDT had not erred, such as to affect the decision of the case, when it rejected the parties’ joint motion to refer their case to mediation.

The UNAT found that the UNDT had not erred when it identified the staff member’s argument as a challenge to the policy of the Organization but had erred when it held that it did not have jurisdiction to incidentally examine the consistency of...

The staff member, who served as an Associate Human Rights Officer at the P-2 level, applied for the Human Rights Officer post at the P-4 level. The hiring manager conducted a desk review of the job applications and, as a result, decided not to shortlist the staff member. Accordingly, his candidacy did not proceed in the selection process.

The UNAT noted that the UNDT had found it impossible to determine whether the document produced by the Secretary-General, reflecting the Administration’s assessment of the staff member’s skills, experience and suitability, constituted a “contemporaneous...

The UNAT noted that in its prior Judgment the UNAT had found that the staff member knew or reasonably should have known of the contested decisions from the date he was notified by email of the reclassification of his post, or at the very latest on the date the initial job opening was advertised on Inspira.

The UNAT held that the alleged new fact that the vacancy for the post was filled 13 months after the staff member left the Organization would not have materially impacted the outcome of its prior Judgment. The UNAT accordingly found the application for revision not receivable ratione...

L’UNAT a estimé que l’inscription du nom de l’ancien fonctionnaire dans la base de données ClearCheck résultait de la décision
définitive de l’Administration selon laquelle il avait commis des abus sexuels et du harcèlement sexuel à l’encontre de la plaignante, et que, dans la mesure où cette inscription l’empêchait d’occuper à l’avenir un emploi au sein du système commun des Nations Unies, elle constituait en réalité une mesure disciplinaire et devait être examinée en tant que telle.

L’UNAT a estimé que le recours du Secrétaire général concernant le recours à un expert en psychologie dans l...

The UNAT found that the UNDT did not err in finding that Ms. Johnson-Simmons’s claim to compensation for unpaid taxes not receivable, as not only did Ms. Johnson-Simmons fail to identify the contested administrative decision regarding reimbursement for income tax payments, but she also admitted that she did not submit the matter for management evaluation, and there was no indication that she had paid any taxes.

The UNAT found that Ms. Johnson-Simmons knowingly and intentionally concealed relevant information about her changed residency status from the Organization, and she also willfully...

L’UNAT a noté qu’une partie de la demande d’évaluation par la direction formulée par la fonctionnaire ne semblait pas avoir été prise en compte par le TDNU. L’UNAT a estimé que les informations figurant dans le formulaire type MER constituaient une demande d’évaluation par la direction des décisions contestées, y compris le non-respect d’une promesse présumée de maintenir son emploi en garantissant le financement de son poste pendant une période donnée. L’UNAT a estimé que la fonctionnaire avait suffisamment soulevé les questions relatives à la légalité de la suppression de son poste et de la...

L’UNAT a noté que, dans sa requête, le fonctionnaire avait clairement identifié la décision contestée comme étant le courriel de la Caisse des pensions l’informant que ses prestations de retraite avaient déjà été versées et qu’il n’avait droit à aucune autre
prestation.

L’UNAT a noté qu’il n’avait pas demandé de réexamen de la décision ni interjeté appel devant le Comité permanent du Conseil de la Caisse des pensions, mais qu’il avait plutôt déposé une demande d’évaluation par la direction, puis interjeté appel devant le Tribunal des litiges. L’UNAT a estimé que, de ce fait, il n’avait pas...

L’UNAT a estimé qu’elle n’avait pas compétence à l’égard de Mme Fogarty, car celle-ci était une ancienne employée de l’OMI et que la décision qu’elle contestait – à savoir l’absence d’enquête de la part de l’OMI à l’encontre du directeur de l’administration – n’avait pas d’incidence sur les conditions de son ancien contrat de travail. Le TNA a relevé qu’il avait déjà établi, dans son jugement n° 2026-TNA-1620, que le comportement du directeur de l’administration, dont Mme Fogarty se plaignait, n’avait entraîné aucune conséquence négative pour elle en ce qui concerne sa demande de prestations...

L’UNAT a estimé que le UNDT n’avait commis aucune erreur de fait ni de droit en concluant que le comportement de la fonctionnaire constituait une faute grave.

L’UNAT a noté que le UNDT avait examiné les explications fournies par la fonctionnaire concernant les erreurs commises lors de la présentation des demandes de subvention pour l’éducation spécialisée, mais qu’il s’était prononcé contre elle en se fondant sur son évaluation de son manque de crédibilité. L’UNAT a estimé que ses conjectures quant aux éléments de preuve qu’un témoin potentiel aurait pu apporter relevaient de la simple...

The UNAT found that in the absence of an express mandate in the legal framework that a continuing appointment can be extended or a staff member be re-instated for the purpose of utilizing sick leave, Mr. Iacovino’s entitlement to sick leave ceased on the date specified in his termination letter, 31 December 2023. The UNAT recognized that pursuant to ST/AI/2005/3, staff on fixed-term appointments may be granted an extension to utilize an entitlement to sick leave, but there is no analogous rule applicable to staff serving on a continuing appointment, much less to staff whose appointments have...

The staff member who was on a roster of suitable candidates for the Senior Service Desk Officer (SSDO) post was informed that the SSDO post was reclassified to the IT Service Delivery Officer (ISDO) post and the job description had changed to the degree that his membership in the SSDO roster was not applicable to the ISDO post. He expressed interest in applying for the ISDO post but did not apply.

The UNAT noted that the staff member was not the incumbent of the SSDO post at the time of reclassification. The UNAT held that the reclassification of the SSDO post to the ISDO post had not...

L'UNAT a estimé que le fonctionnaire n'avait fourni aucun motif à l'appui de son recours, dans la mesure où il n'avait pas répondu aux conclusions de la Commission de recours concernant l'irrecevabilité de sa demande devant celle-ci, et qu'il n'avait donc pas
satisfait à l'obligation qui lui incombait de présenter des arguments en faveur de son recours. Aucun argument n'a été avancé qui
aurait permis à l'UNAT d'examiner si la décision de la Commission de recours était entachée d'un vice de forme.

Le Tribunal a rejeté le recours et a confirmé la décision de la Commission de recours.

Le Tribunal d’appel a rejeté l’argument de M. Jin selon lequel le Tribunal administratif des Nations Unies (UNTD) avait commis une erreur en concluant à l’absence de préjudice, dans la mesure où, selon ses calculs, la décision d’attribuer la note maximale à la
partie 2 de chaque candidat avait conduit à un groupe de candidats admis à l’entretien plus large, ce qui lui avait porté préjudice. Le Tribunal d’appel a estimé que cet argument relevait de la spéculation, qu’il reposait sur un scénario hypothétique et qu’il ne
répondait pas à la charge de la preuve incombant à M. Jin, qui devait...