鶹ý

UNDT/2021/031

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The challenge against the UMOJA process and its automated response to the Applicant, as articulated in this application, is therefore not receivable ratione materiae. If there was no action taken in the Applicant’s precise individual case but there was only general action applicable to all staff members, there is no administrative decision for purposes of pursuing a receivable appeal to the Tribunal. If the action that is challenged produced no direct legal consequences, this is a further lacuna in the subject matter of an appeal that renders it not receivable.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

Challenge against the Respondent’s decision to apply “the old rules” relating to rest and recuperation breaks in hardship duty stations, which practise the Applicant argues requires him to knowingly provide false information.

Legal Principle(s)

The contested UMOJA automated responses or notifications do not constitute an administrative decision, because they neither applied individually to the Applicant nor produced any legal consequences that were inconsistent with his terms of employment.

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.

Solvsten