91Â鶹ÌìÃÀ

UNAT considered the Appellant’s appeal and had to determine: whether her marriage to the late former staff member was legally valid at the time of his separation from the Organisation in 1998; and whether the Organisation created a legal expectancy of acknowledgement of benefits to the Appellant. UNAT found that the former staff member’s alleged divorce from his first wife was not legally valid because the authorities pronouncing it were not competent and did not apply the law under which the marriage had been concluded. It follows that his second marriage to the Appellant was not valid at the time of its celebration, due to the existence of his valid first marriage concluded under French law. UNAT accordingly held that UNJSPF correctly found that the Appellant was not entitled to a widow’s benefit since she was not legally married to the former staff member from the time he separated from UNDP until his death. With respect to whether the Appellant was entitled to an acknowledgement of benefits, UNAT noted that UNJSPF’s confirmation of her entitlement was based on the former staff member’s misleading statement that he had validly divorced his first wife and married the Appellant. UNAT accordingly held that the Appellant did not have a legitimate expectancy of acknowledgement of benefits. UNAT dismissed the appeal in its entirety.