51³Ô¹Ï

UNDT/2025/012

UNDT/2025/012, Igor Kulga

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The Tribunal rejected the Applicant’s arguments and found that the decision to recover a portion of the Applicant’s Home Leave lump sum was lawful.

The Applicant manifestly abused the judicial review process by filing a frivolous application. The Applicant repeatedly lied to the Administration for over six months in seeking to obtain and keep a Home Leave lump sum payment to which he was not entitled.

Still seeking to keep the lump sum in full, he filed an application with the Tribunal. In his application, and his subsequent submissions, the Applicant repeated his lies and even expanded upon them. Accordingly, the Respondent and the Tribunal were required to expend hours dealing with this case.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision to recover a portion of his Home Leave lump sum which he received in January 2024.

Legal Principle(s)

The Dispute Tribunal has the inherent power to individualize and define an administrative decision challenged by a party and to identify the subject(s) of judicial review.

United Nations Secretariat administrative issuances do not apply to UNFPA unless their applicability is expressly provided for in the administrative issuance or expressly accepted by UNFPA being a separately administered fund.

Article 10.6 of the Tribunal’s Statute provides that where the Dispute Tribunal determines that a party has manifestly abused the proceedings before it, it may award costs against that party.

Outcome

Dismissed on merits

Outcome Extra Text

The application was denied in its entirety and the Tribunal awarded the Respondent costs of USD2,746 against the Applicant.

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.