Âé¶¹´«Ã½

UNDT/2019/057

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The Applicant’s appointment was not renewed due to the reclassification of her post from G-4 to G-6 level, and there was a legitimate reason for the reclassification, and thus abolishment of the Applicant’s post. The Applicant has not met her burden of proving that the contested decision was biased or was motivated by other improper purposes. There was insufficient evidence that the Administration made a firm commitment or express promise to renew the Applicant’s fixed-term appointment. The Applicant having provided no evidence of any harm, there is no basis for an award for moral damages.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

Non-renewal of Applicant's fixed-term appointment.

Legal Principle(s)

The Secretary-General has broad discretion in assessing the operational needs of the Organization, and to organize and restructure the work of the Organization accordingly. In pursuance of the duty of good faith, reasons should be given particularly so that staff members can properly exercise their right to appeal and take whatever action necessary. There must be a valid reason for the non-renewal of any contract, including a fixed-term contract, and that the staff member must be informed of that reason explicitly. A decision not to renew a contract may not be taken for improper motives, and thus the Tribunal is required to consider whether the motives were proper or whether there were any countervailing circumstances that may have tainted such decision with unlawfulness. Legitimate expectation may result in the creation of an enforceable legal right, although the application of the doctrine is subject to a number of qualifications. A legitimate expectation giving rise to contractual or legal obligations occurs where a party acts in such a way, by representation by deeds or words, that is intended or is reasonably likely to induce the other party to act in some way in reliance upon that representation, and the other party does so. Where a staff member claims that she had a legitimate expectation arising from a promise made by the Administration, such expectation must not be based on mere verbal assertions, but on a firm and express commitment made individually to the staff member by a competent authority of the Administration. Even where the Administration may be under an obligation to make proper reasonable and good faith efforts to find alternative posts for displaced staff members, the latter are expected to apply for suitable available positions and obliged to fully cooperate and make good faith efforts in order for their applications to succeed. Even where a staff member shall be retained in preference, the latter must show readiness and interest by timely and completely applying for positions before any determination regarding suitability can be made.

Outcome

Dismissed on merits

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.