Search
2025-UNAT-1596, Maciej Fagasinski
The UNAT held that the UNDT did not err when it relied on ST/AI/20100/4/Rev.1 (Administration of Temporary Appointments) in finding that the staff member’s performance evaluation was made in accordance with the procedural requirements in that Administrative Instruction. ST/AI/2021/4 (Performance Management and Development System) does not apply to Mr. Fagasinski’s performance evaluation, because the aforementioned Instruction explicitly states that it does not apply to temporary appointments.
The UNAT found that the purpose of the performance evaluation was not to reexamine whether Mr...
2025-UNAT-1594, Ismail Mahmoud Awadat
The UNAT held that the UNRWA Dispute Tribunal did not err in concluding that the former staff member’s misconduct was established and that the disciplinary measure of separation from service, with compensation in lieu of notice and without termination indemnity, was proportionate under the Agency’s regulatory framework. The UNAT emphasized that fraud and collusive practices are considered areas of high concern and that misconduct committed by a person in a position of trust, such as a member of the Provident Fund Loans Committee, warrants a severe sanction.
The UNAT further held that the UNRWA...
2025-UNAT-1593, Sheldon Heron Carter
The UNAT determined that the decision to maintain the staff member’s performance rating “C – Partially meets expectations” constituted a reviewable administrative decision that had direct legal effect on his employment. It observed that under the applicable legal framework, a rating of “Partially meets expectations” justifies a determination that a salary increment is not warranted, and that the increment shall be withheld pending the outcome of a PIP. The UNAT considered these consequences to be disadvantageous effects resulting directly from the rating.
The UNAT also concluded that the...
2025-UNAT-1592, Deogracious Bwire Adundo
The UNAT held that the staff member’s claims of fraudulent manipulation of his electronic leave records failed for want of proof.
The UNAT further held that the UNDT erred by leaving crucial factual issues unresolved, which made it impossible to determine the appeal fully. The UNAT found that the tables summarizing the staff member’s sick leave records were not hearsay but qualified as business records entitled to a presumption of accuracy unless rebutted. However, the UNAT was not satisfied that these records were accurate and noted unresolved inconsistencies. Accordingly, the UNAT further...
UNDT/2025/089, Assamis Compaore
The Victim clearly had a motive not to tell the truth before the Tribunal. And she had an interest in the outcome of this case since continued payments fromthe Applicant depended on his continued employment with the 黑料专区 in Congo. She even agreed that she was concerned about how she would survivewithout financial support from the Applicant. For all these reasons, the Tribunal did not find her testimony in court to be credible and relied instead on the statements she made before the Applicant’s payments. A similar analysis applied to the Applicant’s testimony. He too had an obvious...
2025-UNAT-1591, Priscilla Ngigi
The UNAT held that the UNDT correctly applied the judicial review tests under Article 2(1)(b) of its Statute. It found that the facts of misconduct were established by clear and convincing evidence, including direct testimony from refugees, corroborating documentary evidence, and hearsay, and that the former staff member had solicited bribes from refugees on multiple occasions between 2010 and 2019 in exchange for assistance with resettlement and other UNHCR services. It held that the established facts legally amounted to serious misconduct and that the sanction of dismissal was proportionate...
2025-UNAT-1590, ABE
The UNAT disagreed with the UNDT’s finding that it was not clear that the issues raised by ABE were previously raised and resolved by a prior UNDT case concerning ABE. The UNAT considered it clear that the issues before the UNDT had previously been decided by the Dispute Tribunal. The issue of alleged negligence in making medical referrals was therefore res judicata and should not have been considered again by the UNDT in the case on appeal. The UNAT thus agreed with the conclusion of the UNDT that ABE’s application was not receivable, but it came to this conclusion for different reasons.
The...
2025-UNAT-1589, Ufuoma Choice Okoro
The UNAT held that the former staff member’s challenge to the ALWP decision and the New York position decision was not receivable, as she had not sought management evaluation of those decisions.
Regarding the disciplinary measure, the UNAT determined that her statements and social media posts constituted unauthorized outside activities amounting to misconduct. It noted that she issued statements, posted articles, and gave interviews without prior authorization, despite repeated warnings. It held that her social media engagements referenced international humanitarian assistance, humanitarian...
2025-UNAT-1588, Dorah Likukela
The UNAT determined that it had been demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that the former staff member committed serious misconduct by: i) failing to return to the 黑料专区 Federal Credit Union (UNFCU) funds of USD 587,428.65 that were erroneously credited to her account and to which she was not entitled; ii) failing to comply with a judgment issued by the High Court of Zambia (High Court Judgment), which ordered her to return the aforementioned funds to UNFCU; and iii) submitting false documentation and/or misrepresenting facts during the investigation conducted by the Office...
2025-UNAT-1585, Islam Isam Hafez Said
The UNAT held that the UNRWA Dispute Tribunal did not err in concluding that the former staff member’s claim regarding the calculation of Provident Fund benefits was unfounded because the Agency correctly applied the governing legal framework. The UNAT found that, under Area Staff Rule 106.1(16)(D)(ii), the last published special interest rate applies up to and including the month immediately preceding payment. Since the payment was made in August 2022, the Agency properly applied PF Secretariat Circular PFS/08/2022, which declared a negative special interest rate of -15.18% for January–June...
2025-UNAT-1586, Amjad Issa
The Tribunal found that Mr. Issa’s application does not satisfy the stringent prerequisites for receivability under the UNAT Statute, namely, that the decisive fact he now relies upon, that all UNRWA offices in the West Bank field were closed completely, was unknown to the Appeals Tribunal and to himself, prior to the Judgment. This was plainly known to Mr. Issa, rendering his application non-receivable on this ground alone.
The UNAT noted that Mr. Issa does not present, or even purport to possess, evidence that he in fact had complied with UNRWA’s directives to advise the Agency of his...
2025-UNAT-1587, Neha Mehta
The UNAT held that the UNDT erred in finding that the former staff member’s performance had not been fairly and objectively evaluated. It found that she knew that her telecommuting arrangement was temporary and nevertheless reported to her duty station in Fiji only months later. It emphasized that her delay in requesting the payment of a travel lump sum and in applying for a visa for her mother did not excuse her failure to report timeously. The UNAT confirmed that, in assessing her performance, the Administration was entitled to consider the extent of, reasons, and consequences of her...
2025-UNAT-1584, Noureddin Khaled Ahmed Saleh
The UNAT held that the UNRWA Dispute Tribunal did not err in concluding that the former staff member’s claim regarding the calculation of Provident Fund benefits was unfounded because the Agency correctly applied the governing legal framework. The UNAT found that, under Area Staff Rule 106.1(16)(D)(ii), the last published special interest rate applies up to and including the month immediately preceding payment. Since the payment was made in August 2022, the Agency properly applied PF Secretariat Circular PFS/08/2022, which declared a negative special interest rate of -15.18% for January–June...
2025-UNAT-1583, Martin Akerman
The UNAT held that the UNDT did not err in concluding that the former staff member’s application was not receivable ratione materiae because he did not attempt to resolve the dispute through the office of the 黑料专区 Funds and Programmes Ombudsman, as explicitly required by the Settlement Agreement to which he had expressly agreed. The UNAT found that the terms of the Settlement Agreement remained binding and enforceable on the parties, and that the UNDT committed no error in holding the parties to its terms.
The UNAT further found that the UNDT did not err in determining that the...
2025-UNAT-1582, Olexandr Maruschak
The UNAT observed that there may have been some ambiguity in paragraph 104 of the UNAT Judgment for which the Secretary-General requested interpretation. The UNAT held that the appropriate interpretation was that when the UNDT renders its new decision on Article 10(5) and 10(6) of the UNDT Statute, then the non-prevailing party may appeal the new UNDT judgment in its entirety, including the UNDT’s holding on the merits.
The UNAT found that the Secretary-General’s application for interpretation is admissible and granted. It further noted that once the UNDT fully exercises its jurisdiction on...
UNDT/2025/064, Iacovino
Receivability
After considering the evidence on record, the Tribunal found that the challenge to the decision to abolish the Applicant’s post and terminate his continuing appointment was not receivable. It held that the only matter before it was the decision not to extend the Applicant’s employment to cover his sick leave, but instead to terminate his appointment and separate him while he was on certified sick leave.
Merits
First, the Tribunal assessed whether the Applicant was on certified sick leave at the time of his separation on 31 December 2023.
Although sick leave was not formally recorded...
2025-UNAT-1581, Waleed Ammar
The UNAT held that the UNDT erred in finding that the Administration had not proven by clear and convincing evidence that Mr. Ammar made the Facebook post because the Inspector General’s Office (IGO) inappropriately discounted the possibility that Mr. Ammar’s Facebook account had been hacked. The UNAT found that the Administration met its burden of establishing that it was highly probable that Mr. Ammar posted the Comment and thus publicly expressed support for an honour killing. The Administration produced uncontradicted evidence that the comment came from Mr. Ammar’s Facebook account and he...
2025-UNAT-1579, Marwan Dalal
The UNAT held that the UNDT correctly determined that the non-selection decision was superseded and rendered moot by the Administration's subsequent rescission of the decision, which ended the selection process without anyone being selected for the position. It concluded that, from that moment, the non-selection decision ceased to have any legal effect and was no longer a live issue on which the UNDT had jurisdiction to pass judgment on.
The UNAT further affirmed that it was entirely within the Administration’s authority to rescind the non-selection decision given the procedural irregularities...
2025-UNAT-1580, Jonathan Hall
The UNAT noted that as per ISA’s Staff Rule the UNAT has the competence to “order an interim measure to provide temporary relief to either party to prevent irreparable harm and to maintain consistency with the decision taken at the first instance level”. The UNAT also has jurisdiction to order interim measures in appropriate cases arising out of an ISA dispute as is the case in Mr. Hall’s Motion.
However, the UNAT found that Mr. Hall had failed to demonstrate that relief by way of interim measures was necessary to prevent irreparable harm and to maintain consistency with the JAB’s decision. Mr...
2025-UNAT-1578, Zekriat Swaidan
The UNAT noted that the staff member had applied for vacancies of different posts, at different times, with different selection processes, and had not been selected for different reasons. The UNAT found that the UNDT had correctly decided that each of these decisions was separate and there was no evidence that they were related. The UNAT held that she had not met her burden of showing that the impugned Judgment was defective.
The UNAT held that the application in respect of the post in Pretoria was clearly out of time and in respect of the post in Nairobi premature and, as such, not receivable...