UNDT/2012/006, Zedan
UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements
Outcome: Judgment for the Applicant. The UNDT ordered: (i) USD50,000 for the breach of the Applicant’s right to be properly considered for an appointment beyond 31 December 2005 and resultant harm; (ii) USD20,000 for anxiety and emotional distress. The Tribunal finds that the Respondent failed to give full, fair, and proper consideration to the Applicant’s candidacy, contrary to the unanimous recommendation of the Bureau of the COP. The UNDT found that had the Respondent followed proper procedure and afforded proper consideration, the Applicant stood a significantly high chance of receiving an appointment extending beyond 31 December 2005. The UNDT ordered that the Applicant be paid USD50,000 as compensation for the established breach of his rights and the resultant damage, including loss of potential employment, earnings and any associated benefits and entitlements. The UNDT also ordered that the Applicant be paid USD20,000 as compensation for anxiety and emotional distress.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Applicant appealed against the decision not to renew his fixed-term appointment as the Executive Secretary, Convention on Biological Diversity (“CBD”) beyond 31 December 2005. The UNDT found that the Respondent failed to satisfy the UNDT that the Applicant’s situation was considered in accordance with the terms of the established procedure for the appointment of the Executive Secretary, CBD, as agreed between UNEP and the COP.
Legal Principle(s)
Expectancy of renewal: In principle, fixed-term contracts do not carry an expectancy of renewal. However, an expectancy of renewal may be created by countervailing circumstances, such as violation of due process, arbitrariness, or extraneous motivation on the part of the Administration. All administrative decisions should be given full and fair consideration and should be based on proper grounds and be in conformity with the requirements of due process. Burden of proof: The onus is on the Applicant to produce sufficient evidence of harassment, unfair prejudice or any kind of improper motive. Audit trail: The Administration should have an audit trail evidencing the procedural steps leading up to its decisions so as to give effect to the General Assembly’s commitment to the principle of accountability in decision-making processes.