91Â鶹ÌìÃÀ

2017-UNAT-736, Williams

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

UNAT held that the Applicant was not entitled to a widow’s benefit under Article 34 of the UNJPSF Regulations as she married Mr Williams, her deceased husband, after his separation from service. UNAT noted that, under Article 35ter of the UNJSPF Regulations, the survivor’s benefit had to be purchased by a retiree who marries after separation from service as an annuity within a prescribed one-year deadline after the date of the marriage. UNAT noted that Mr Williams had elected not to do so. UNAT held that there was no obligation for UNJSPF to inform Mr Williams of the option. UNAT held that, while Mr Williams had submitted a form (PENS. A/2) designating his wife (and sons) as potential recipients for the purposes of a residual settlement on which he had noted that the Appellant was his wife, this did not convey a clear and unambiguous choice on the part of Mr Williams to purchase an annuity under Article 35ter. On the Appellant’s contentions that the UNJSPF has a responsibility in ensuring the accuracy and completeness of all participants’ records and was neglectful in its duty by not requesting proof of the marriage so as to verify whether the wife indicated on the form was indeed a prospective survivor possible subject to Article 35ter, UNAT held that there was no specific provision establishing such an obligation. UNAT noted that due to the contributory nature of the benefits, ad hoc and post factum additions of the beneficiaries would appear to be prejudicial to the interests of other participants, UNJSPF did not created a reasonable expectation on the part of Mr Williams that his wife would be receipt of a widow’s benefit after his death. On the Appellant’s submission that her due process rights were not respected by the Standing Committee when it reviewed her case some 266 days after receipt of her request, UNAT held that it did not consider that the Appellant experienced any inordinate delay in the hearing of her appeal. UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the decision of the UNJSPF Standing Committee.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision not to pay her a widow’s benefit (under Article 34 of the UNJPSF Regulations) or a survivor’s benefit (under Article 35ter of the UNJSPF Regulations).

Legal Principle(s)

A retiree who wishes to purchase an annuity for his new spouse bears the onus of submitting the relevant application to UNJSPF making this choice.

Outcome
Appeal dismissed on merits

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.

Applicants/ Appellants
Williams
Entity
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry Location :
Date of Judgment
Judge(s)
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type