UNDT/2024/024 | SYSTEM OF ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

UNDT/2024/024, Marchetti

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The Applicant’s argument that the former staff rule 3.17(b) (now staff rule 3.15) was/is relevant for purposes of computation of the time within which she should have sought management evaluation is flawed. The former staff rule 3.17(b) (now staff rule 3.15) relates to retroactivity of payments, and not to the issue of increase of step which is what her application is about.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

The Applicant contests the “[d]ecision not to grant [her] request under staff rule 3.17 for increase of step”.

Legal Principle(s)

Under the jurisprudence of the Appeals Tribunal, the notification of the contested decision occurs when the staff member receives the decision in writing (see, for instance, Manco 2013-UNAT-342, para. 20, and Seyfollahzadeh 2016-UNAT-620, para. 26). The Appeals Tribunal has also “consistently held that the reiteration of an original administrative decision, if repeatedly questioned by a staff member, does not reset the clock with respect to statutory timelines; rather time starts to run from the date on which the original decision was made” (see, Staedler 2015-UNAT-546, para. 46, and similarly in, for instance, Aliko 2015-UNAT-539, Kazazi 2015-UNAT-557, Thambiah 2013-UNAT-385, Cooke 2012-UNAT-275, Sethia 2010-UNAT-079, and Shayoun 2021-UNAT-1149).

Outcome

Dismissed as not receivable

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.

Full Judgment

Applicants/ Appellants

Marchetti

Entity

UN Secretariat

Case Number(s)

UNDT/NY/2023/021

Tribunal

UNDT

Registry Location :

New York