Â鶹APP

The Tribunal found that Mr. Issa¡¯s application does not satisfy the stringent prerequisites for receivability under the UNAT Statute, namely, that the decisive fact he now relies upon, that all UNRWA offices in the West Bank field were closed completely, was unknown to the Appeals Tribunal and to himself, prior to the Judgment. This was plainly known to Mr. Issa, rendering his application non-receivable on this ground alone.

The UNAT noted that Mr. Issa does not present, or even purport to possess, evidence that he in fact had complied with UNRWA¡¯s directives to advise the Agency of his availability to work during the strike. Mr. Issa only asserts that other staff members were paid despite the closure of certain facilities. Even if this was a newly discovered fact, which it is not, this assertion could not affect the outcome of the proceeding since he does not claim that these other employees failed to comply with the advance notification directives. Because the asserted fact would not have changed the outcome, it does not meet the threshold requirement of being ¡°decisive¡±, regardless of when it was known to Mr. Issa.

Mr. Issa has thus failed to establish the fundamental predicates for a revision of the prior UNAT Judgment and his effort to initiate a second round of litigation must be denied.

The application is dismissed.