INTERNATIONALCOTFJUSTICE
PLEADINGS, ORAL ARGUMENTS, DOCUMENTS
APPLICATIONFOR REVIEW
OF JUDGEMENTNo. 273OF THE UNITED
NATIONS ADMINISTRATIVETRIBUNAL
COUR INTERNATIOEE JUSTICE
MÉMOIRES, PLAIDOIRIES ET DOCUMENTS
DEMANDE DE RÉFORMATION
DU JUGEMENT No273 DU TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIFDES NATIONS UNIES Abbreviatedreference:
1C J Pleudtng~A . pplrculto/orRe~iew O/ JudgemenrNo 273 of
the UnitedNationsAdmintsrrnciv~ Trihunul
Référence abrégée:
C.I.J. Mémoires,Demandede réformaiiondujugementno273
du Tribunaladministrati/desNoiionsUnies APPLICATIONFOR REVIEWOF JUDGEMENTNo. 273
OF THE UNITED NATIONS ADMINISTRATIVETRIBUNAL
DEMANDE DE RÉFORMATIONDU JUGEMENTNO273
DU TRIBUNAL ADMINISTRATIF DES NATIONS UNIES INTERNATIONALCOURTOF JUSTICE
PLEADINGS,ORAL ARGUMENTS,DOCUMENTS
APPLICATIONFOR REVIEW
OF JUDGEMENT No. 273 OF THE UNITED
NATIONS ADMINISTRATIVETRIBUNAL
COUR INTERNATIONALEDE JUSTICE
M~MOIRES,PLAIDOIRIESET DOCUMENTS
DEMANDE DE RÉFORMATION
DU JUGEMENT N" 273 DU TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIF DES NATIONS UNIES The present volume reproduces theRequest for opinion, the written stale-
ments and comments, and the correspondence in the case concerning the
Application for Reviewof Judgement No. 273 of the United Narions Administra-
tive Tribunal.his case, entered on the Court's General List on 28 Ju1981
under number 66, was the subject of an Advisoty Opinion deliveredon $0luly
1982 (Application forReview of Judgement No. 273 of the United Narions
Administrative Tribunal. Advisory Opinion. I.C.J. Reports 1p. 325).
The Hague, 1982.
Le présent volumereproduit la requêtepour avisconsultatif, lesexposésécrits
et observations écrites etla correspondance concernant l'affaireDemande
de réformation dujugement w 273 du Tribunal admhistratif&s Natiom Unies.
Cette affaire, inscrite au rôle général de laCour sous le n66éle 28juillet
1982,a fait I'objet d'un avis consultatif rendu le 20 juille(Demande de
réformation dujugementw 273 du Tribunal adminirtrari/des Narions Unies,avis
consultatf, C.I.J. Recueil 19p. 325).
La Haye, 1982. P
Request for AdvisoryOpinion- Requêtepour ans cornultatif
THESECRETARY-GENE UFLTHE UNITED NATION SO THE PRESIDEN Of
THE INTERNATIONC ALLIRTOF JUST~C ...........
Dossiertrammitted by theSecretary-Ceneral of the United Nati(An. 65,
para. 2, of the Statut-) Dossier transmis par le Secrétairegénél es
Nations Unies (art. 65, par. 2, du Statut)
INT~ODUCTOR NYon .............. : ..
Part 1of the dossier. Documents relating to the pfoceedingsleading to
the request by the Committee on Applications for Review of
Administrative Tribunal Judgements for an advisory opinion of the
International Court of Justice in relation to Judgement No. 273 of
the Administrative Tribunal .............
A. Documents of the Twenlieth Session of the Committee on
Applications for Reviewof Administrative Tribunal Judgements
B. Other documents citedin or relevant to documents considered by
the Committee on Applications for Review of Administrative
Tribunal Judgements at ils Twentieth Session......
C. Documents suhmitted to the United Nations Administrative
Tribunal: Case No. 257: Mortished against the Secretary-Gen-
eral of the United Nations ............
Part 11of the dossier. Documents relating to the repatriation grant
scheme ....................
A. Documents of the Fourth Session of the General Assembly .
B. Documents of the Fifth Session of the General Assembly . .
C. Documents of the Sixth Session of the General Assembly . .
D. Documents of the Twelfth Sessionof the Consultative Commit-
tee on Administrative Questions (1952)........
E. Documents of the Elevenih Session of the General Assembly.
F. Documents of the Eighteenth Session of the General Assembly
, G. Documents of the Twenty-fifth Session of the Co.....ative
H. Documents on the Forty-first Session of the Consultative Com-
mittee on Administrative Questions (1974).......
1. Documents of the Twenty-ninth Session of the General
Assembly ... ..............
J. Documents of the Thirty-~rst Session of the General Assem-
bly .....................
K. Documenis of the Forty-cighth Scsnion of the Consuliaii\c
Committce on Admin~strati\c Questions (1978) . .
L. Documents of thc Thirty-third Session of the ~encral ~ssem-
bly .....................
M. Documents of the Thirty-fourth Session of the General As-
sembly ..................
N. Documents of the ~hirtv-fifth Session of the General Assemblv
O. United Nations staffmies on repatriation grant sinceestablish-
ment of repatriation grsnt scheme on 1 January1951 ...x CONTENTS
Page
CONTEN~ OF THE DOSSIER (under this heading are listed the titles of the
documents reproduced, while the titles of those not reproduced are
mentioned in the text) ................ 14
Application dated 15 June 1981 submitted by the United States of
Americain accordance with Article II, paragraph 1,of the Statute of
the Administrative Tribunal. ............. 14
Memorandum dated 23 June 1981 from the Secretary-General ad-
dressed to the Secretary of the Committee. ..... 15
Letter dated 23 June 1981from Mr. Sylvanus A. ~iewul, counsel for
MI. Mortished, addressed to the Secretary of the Committee with
comments on the application presented by the United States of
..............................~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~
Report of the ~o&miltee . . ...... . 25
Transcript of the proceedings of ibe'first meeting (close.j 28
Transcript of the proceedings at the wond meeting (closed part). . 43
Transcript of the proceedings at the second meetini (open part)
Tribunal administratif: Jugement no273 .
Wrinen Staternents- Exposés écrits
1. L ~ R OF 30 NOVEMBE1R 981 ~OM THE SECRETARY-GENE RATLHE
UNITEDNATIONS TO THE ACTING PRESIDENTOF THE INTUINA~ONAL
COURT OF JUSTICE ................. 99
STATEMEN OF MR. IVORhm MOR~SHED ........ 100
Part1. .................... 100
A. Summary of pleadings ............. 100
B. Explanatory note ............... LOI
Part II. Background. ............... 103
A. The repatriation grant ............. 103
1. Nature and origin .... ........ 103
2. Evolution of the staffniles on the repatriation granl . 108
B. The oroceedinew hefore the United Nations Administrative
Tribunal ....... .......... 113
C. Action taken hy the secretary-&neral pursuant to Judgement
No. 273 .................. 115
D. Action before the Committee on Applications for Review of
AdministrativeTribunalJudg em.en.ts 116
E. Concerning the proceedings before the International Court of
Justice. .................. 123
PartIII. Elaboration of pleadings ........... 124
A. lnasmuch as the procedure by which the advisory opinion was
requested allows a member State which was not a party to the
original proceedings hefore the Administrative Tribunal to
request a reviewof thejudgement of the Tribunal, il is legally
defective hecause:
1. It impinges upon the authonty of the Secretary-General
under Article 97 of the United Nations Charter as chier
administrative officer of the Organization, and conflicu
with Article 100of the Charter regarding the "exclusively
international character" of the Secretariat..... 124
2. It nolates the general principles governing judicial re-
new .................. 126 Page
3. It imposes in a hilateral dispute a condition of legal and
practical inequality upon one of the parties. .... 131
B. Apart from the legal defects of the Article Il procedure, the
Committee's decision to request the Court's advisory opinion
is legally defective, for the following reasons:
1. The Committee receivedan application whichin substance
did no1fall within the lems of Article Il of the Statute of
the Trihunal and in form violated Article II of the
Committee's Provisional Rules of Procedure, and acted
favourahly on the legally defective application .... 134
2. The committee in ils proceedings violated the following
fundamental principles of natural justice: audi airerom
parrem, and nernojudex in causasua ....... 135
3. The committee failed Io adopt a uniform interpretation of
Article II in the present case in which the applicant is a
member State ............... 138
4. The memhers of the Cornmittee at its twentieth session
lacked the competence for. or else failed to perform the
functions required of the committee. ....... 139
5. There isnothing exceptional about Judgement No. 273,
recourse to the Court for an advisory opiniont, ....arrant 140
C. In relation to the question suhmitted to the Court by the
committee:
1. To take the position that the Court's function is confined
to determining whether the Tribunal exceeded its jurisdic-
tion in ludgement No. 273 and whether the tribunal
comrnitted an error of law relating to the provisions of the
Charter ............... . 141
2. Conceming thecontention that the Tribunal committi an
error of law relating to the provisions of the Charter, Io
adjudge and declare:
.-, Tha- the committee had no leeal hasis for determin-
ing that the Tnhunal commited an error of ldw
relating10 the provisions of the Chancr 143
(b, The Tnbunal did not commit an error of law relaiing
to the provisions of the Charter ....... 143
(i) ludgement No. 273performed ajudicial function,
namelythe settlementofa specificdispulebetween
the Secretarv-General and Mr. Mortished.-a
function whiihis not conferredupon the ~eneral
Assemhly hy the Charter . . . . 144
(ii) The Trihunal was bound to and did rightiy take
inIo account the whole legal régimeestablished
by the General Assemblyas embodied in the staff
regulations, the staff niles, and the Statute of the
Tribunal iüelf ... . 144
(iii) Nothing in the ~nited ~ations charter prohibits
the Trihunal from denying retroactive eiïect 10a
relation to the staff...he General Assemhl. i. ,145
(iv) The Tribunal was ~~arranted in holding that
the application of General Assemhly resolution CONTENTS
Page
341165should no1prejudice the acquired right of
Mr. Mortished to the payment of a repatriation
grant without evidence of relocation. 148
3. Concerning the contention that the Administrative Tribu-
nal exceededilsjurisdiction or competence, to adjudge and
declare:
(a) That the committee had no basis, none whatsoever,
for impugning the jurisdiction or competence of the
Tribunal with respect to Judgement No. 273 ... 152
(b) The Tribunal did not exceedilsjurisdiction or compe-
tence in Judgement No. 273 ........ 153
D. Further, on the question submitted by the Committee, to
adjudge and declare:
1. That the question submitted to the Court contains the
following misconception of the Judgement, namely, that it
had determined that General Assembly resolution 341165
"could not be given immediate effect"; in fact, the Judge-
ment only held that the resolution should not prejudicethe
acquired nghts of staff members and was on that account
absolutely "warranted". ........... 154
2. Even if the Court agrees that Judgement No. 273 had
determined that General Assemblyresolution 341165could
not be given "immediate effect", the Judgement would still
be warranted ............... 156
Annex 1. The Assistant Secretary-General for Personnel Services to
Mr. Sylvanus A. Tiewul, counsel for Mr. Mortished ..... 158
Annex II. The Secretary, Committee on Applications for Review
of Administrative Tribunal Judgements, to counsel for Mr. Mor-
tished ..................... 159
2. WRITIENSTATEMEN Of THE GOVERNMEN OFTTHE UNITEDSTATE S f
AMERICA. .................... 160
1. Introduction .................. 160
A. Question presented .............. 160
B. The Court's jurisdiction ............ 160
C. The Court's discretion ............. 160
1. The parties 10the dispute are unchanged ...... 161
2. The secretariat's ri hls and status are undiminished. . 162
3. Staff member's rigils an no1 prejudiced by his position
before theCommittee. ............ 163
4. There are important reasons why the Court should exercise
jurisdiction ................ 164
II.Summary of the case ............... 165
A. Historv of a..icant's claim to the United Nations reoatria-
B. Principal legalobjections to the Judgement of the Administra-5
tive Tribunal ................ 166
III. History of repatriation grant............ 168
A. The origin and adoption of the staffregulation concerning the
repatriation grant: conception to 1950. ....... 168 Page
B. Developments relating to the repatnation grant: 1950to 1976 171
C. General Assembly action from 1976 to date concerning the
repatriation grant eligibility requirement of actual relocation 173
IV. Legal objections to the Tribunal's Judgeme....... 178
A. United Nations staff memberscannot have an acquired right
to payment of the repatriation grant without evidence of
relocation required by staff niles in force at the time of their
separation ................. 178
I The repÿtriation grant hîs ülways ken intended only for
expunate staff who rclocîte from the country of las1duty
station upon separation from Unitrd Nations service. the
cvidentia-y requirement wîs consistent with the basic
critenon or eligibility of the grd..... 179
2. The considerations advanced bv the Admin~strativcTrihu-
tion or sustain the findingofan acquireà right to the grant
without evidence of relocation .... . 181
3. In finding that applicant had an acquired "ght, ihe~hbu-
na1failed to give the weight required by Article 101of the
United Nations Charter to the intent of the General
Assembly in its actions regarding the gra..... 184
B. Resolution 341165legally barred repatriation grant payment
without evidence of relocation and the Administrative Tribu-
nal was no<authorized to refuse to give it effe.... 185
1. Resolution 341165was a decision of the General Assembly
under Article 101of the Charter whicb required termina-
tion of the practice of paying repatriation grants without
evidenceof relocation and cancelled transitional Staff Rule
109.5(/). .................~. 185
2. The Administrative Tribunal erred and exceeded ils Juns-
diction in failing to give effect to resolution 341165188
V. Conclusion .................. 191
3.EmÉ ÉCRIT DU GOUVER~MEN DE u %PUBLIQUE FRANÇAISE . . 192
1. La saisine de la Cour.............. 192
II.La validitédu ~u-ement no273 ........... 195
A. Le problème dela juridiction ou de la compétencedu Tribu-
nal. ................. ,195
B. Le problème de;erreur de droit concernant lesdispositions de
la Charte .................. 197
1. Le Tribunal n'a pas méconnules résolutionsde I'Assem-
bléegénérale ............ .199
2. Le Tribunal a fait une application modérdu principe'des
droits acquis ............... 202
Written Commenb - Observationsécrites
1.O~VATION~ ÉCRITFSDU GOUVERNEME NETLA R~PUBLIQUE FRAN-
ÇNSE ..................... .213
2. WRI~ COMMENT OF THE ÛOVERNMEN OF THE UNITE STATES OF
A~CA .................... ,214 1. Jurisdictionof the Court ............ 214
II. The defectivenessof the ~ribunal'sJudgement ...... 215
A .Errorof law relatingto the United NationsCharter ... 215
B. The Tribunal exceededits jurisdiction ........ 217
II. Conclusion .................. 218
Readingof the AdvisoryOpinion .............. 219
Correspondence . Correspondance
Nos . 1-41 ...................... 223 REQUESTFOR ADVISORYOPINION
REQUÊTE POUR AVISCONSULTATIFTHE SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE UNITED NATIONS
TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE INTERNATIONAL
COURT OF JUSTICE
23July 1981.
1have thehonour to refer to Article II of the Statute of the UnitedNations
AdministrativeTribunal wherehya Committeeon Applications forReview of
AdministrativeTribunal Judgementswasestahlishedand wasauthorized,under
paragraph 2 of Article96 of the Charter,.to request advisory opinions of the
International Court of Justice.
The twentieth session of the Committee on Applications for Review of
AdministrativeTribunal Judgements washeldal United Nations Headquarters
from 9to 13July 1981to consideran application presentedto the Committeeby
the United States of Americafor a renew of Judgement No. 273,deliveredby
the United Nations Administrative Tribunal on 15 May 1981,in the case of
Mortishedv. theSecretary-Generalof the UnitedNorions(documentAT/DEC/
273). At ils second meetingof the session, on 13 July 1981,the Committee
decided to request an advisory opinion ofthe International Court of Justice
regarding that Judgement. This decision is recorded in the report of the
Committee on the work of its twentieth session (documentAlAC.86125).
The decisionof the Committeeas formallyannounced hy ils Chaiman reads
as follows:
"The cornmittee on Applicationsfor Reviewof AdministrativeTribunal
Judgements has decidedthat thereisa substantial basiswithinthemeaning
of Article II of the Statute of the AdministrativeTribunal for the applica-
tion presentedhythe UnitedStatesof America forreviewof Administrative
Tribunal Judgement No. 273, delivered at Geneva on 15 May 1981.
Accordingly,the Committee requestsan advisory opinion of theInterna-
tional Court of Justiceon the followingquestion:
'1sthe judgement of the United Nations Administrative Tribunal in
Judgement No. 273, Mortishedv. the Secretary-Generol,warranted in
determining that General Assemblyresolution 341165of 17 December
1979could no1benivenimmediateeffectin requirinn,for the oaymentof
country of the staff member'slas1duty station?'"oÜntryothër than the
1am enclosingherewith one copyeach of the Englishand French tex1of the
report of the Committeein whichthat decisionhas bcendulycertified.Pursuant
to a decisionof the Committee, atranscript of the proaedings al ils twentieth
session is being prepared in English and French and copies thereof will be
transmitted to the Court as soon as possible.
In accordancewith Article65of the Statute of the Court, 1shall transmit to
theCourt al1documentslikelyto throwlightupon the question.Furthemore, as
required by paragraph 2 of Article Il of the Statute of the Administrative
Tnbunal, 1shallarrangeto transmllany news that MI. Mortished,thepersonin
respect of whom the Tribunal 'renderedils Judgement No. 273, may wish to
submit.
(Signed) Kurt WALDHEIM.
Requête pour avis consultatif (y compris le dossier de documents transmis à la Cour en vertu du paragraphe 2 de l'article 65 du Statut)