麻豆APP

UNDT/2016/185

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The UNDT remanded the Applicant’s request to the Secretary-General for consideration. The UNDT directed that, within one month of the date of this judgment, the Applicant shall submit any further documentation to the MSD New York that he wishes to be taken into consideration. The UNDT further ordered that, within 90 calendar days of the date of this Judgment, the Respondent, through a properly designated office, shall render a decision on the Applicant’s request.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant, a Human Rights Officer in the 麻豆APP Stabilization Mission in Haiti (“MINUSTAH”), contested the refusal by Medical Services Division (“MSD”) in New York “to take a decision in regards to [his] sick leave for the past 11 months.”

Legal Principle(s)

Judicial review of cases concerning sick leave requests: The Tribunal does not have the medical expertise to decide on requests for sick leave or whether or not any given medical documentation is “satisfactory.” In the circumstances, it is incumbent upon the Administration to reach a decision on the Applicant’s request. The Applicant shall be provided with an opportunity to submit, within one month of the date of this judgment, any further documentation to the MSD New York that he wishes to file. Thereafter, the Respondent shall identify and collect all pertinent information in the possession of MINUSTAH Medical Section, MSD Geneva, MSD New York, and OHCHR, and render its decision on his request within 90 days of the date of this judgment. Any resulting administrative decision(s) may be subject to appeal as per the standard procedures set out in the Statute of the Dispute Tribunal and the Staff Rules.

Outcome

Judgment entered for Applicant in full or in part

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
Gouin
Entity
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry
Date of Judgement
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type