2015-UNAT-591, Gakumba
UNAT had before it an appeal of judgment No. UNDT/2015/006. As a preliminary matter, UNAT considered a motion to seek to leave to postpone consideration of the Appellant’s appeal due to lack of legal representation. UNAT agreed with the Secretary-General’s claim that the Motion filed by the Appellant was an additional supplemental pleading addressing the merits of his claims. UNAT held that the Appellant had not shown exceptional circumstances justifying the filing of an additional pleading or good cause to postpone consideration of his appeal and his request was denied. UNAT held that UNDT properly treated the Appellant’s application for revision as an application for revision of judgment No. UNDT/2012/192, rather than an application for revision of Gakumba I. UNAT held that the Appellant had reached the end of the judicial process available to him when UNAT denied his request for revision of Gakumba I in Gakumba II (judgment No. 2014-UNAT-492). UNAT held that the Appellant could not return to UNDT for additional review, regardless of the name of the document he filed. UNAT held that res judicata had attached to his case. UNAT held that UNDT correctly determined that the Appellant’s application was not receivable ratione materiae. UNAT held that there was no error of fact or law in UNDT’s conclusion that the Appellant’s application for revision of judgment No. UNDT/2012/192 was not receivable. Noting that the Appellant had not contested the award of costs against him, UNAT considered the Secretary-General’s request that UNAT overturns the UNDT finding of withdrawal of the USD 500 costs and instead order the Appellant to pay that amount to the UNAT Registry. UNAT determined that the issue was not an issue raised on appeal and such concerns should be raised with UNDT. UNAT held that the Appellant manifestly abused the appeals process by bringing the frivolous appeal of an unassailable judgment by UNDT, repeating arguments that did not succeed before UNDT, which had already awarded costs against him. UNAT awarded costs in the amount of USD 500 against the Appellant. UNAT denied the appeal, affirmed the UNDT judgment, and awarded costs (USD 500) against the Appellant.
The Applicant filed an application for revision of Gakumba I (judgment No. 2013-UNAT-387) before UNDT, which treated the application as an application for revision of its previous 2012 judgment (judgment No. UNDT/2012/192). UNDT issued Summary judgment No. UNDT/2015/006, finding the application was not receivable and dismissing it. UNDT awarded costs against the Applicant in the amount of USD 500 for manifestly abusing the UNDT proceedings.
There is no right to be represented by OSLA. The role of UNDT incudes adequately interpreting and comprehending the application submitted by the moving party, whatever name the party attaches to the document. A judgment by UNAT is a final judgment since it is a judgment of the highest tribunal in the UN internal justice system. There must be an end to litigation and the stability of the judicial process requires that final judgments by an appellate court be set aside only on limited grounds and for the gravest of reasons.