Application for the Review of Judgment 158 of the United Nations - Administrative Tribunal - United Nations requests the International Court of Justice to give an Advisory Opinion

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
Peace Palace. The Hague· Tel. 39 23 44 ·Cables: lntercourt, TheHague
. • I

communique
unofliciaJ

for immediarellNIBtl

No. 72/9
10 July 1972

Application for the Review of a Judg.emeot of the
United Nations Administrative Tribunal

The following information is communicated to the press by the
Registry of the International Court of Justice:

On 3 July 1972 the Court received from an organ of the United
Nations a request for an advisory opinion on an administrative is1;iue.
•
Mr. Mohamed Fasla, an official of the United Nations Developrnent
Programme (UNDP). was the holder of a fixed-term appointment which was
due to expire on 31 December 1969. As this appointment was not
renewed, Mr. Fasla appealed successively ta the two bodies competent

to hear applications alleging non-observance of the terms of
appointment or contracts of employment of staff members, namely the
Joint Appeals Board (1969-1971) and the United Nations Administrative
Tribunal (1970-1972). As a result, the Administrative Tribunal,
sitting in Geneva on 28 April 1972, rendered Judgen:en~ No. 158. whereby it
decided in particular that Mr. Fasla should receive six months' salary
and was entitleà ta submit certain claims for reimbursement ta the
Secretary-General.

Mr. Fasla considered that the Administrative Tribunal had not
fully considered and passed upon all his clairns, and he therefore
applied under Article 11 of the Tribunal 1s Statute for a review of
the Judgement. In accordance with the provisions of that Article,
bis application was examined by the Committee on Applications for
Review of Administrative Tribunal Judgements, a cammittee which is
composed of the member States the representatives of which have
s·erved on the General Committee of the most recent regular session
of the General A.ssernbly. In New York on 20 June the Committee on
Applhations decided to request of the International Court of ,Justice
an advisory opinion on the question whether the Administrative Tribunal

had fa11ed to exercise jurisdiction vested in it or had committed a
fundamental error in procedure which had occasioned a failure of
justice. When the Court bas given its advisory opinion, the Secretary­
General has either to give it effect or to request the Tribunal to
convene specially in order ta confirm its original decisi.on or render
a new one.

The request for advisory opinion was transmitted to the Court
by a letter of the Secretary-General dated 28 June, which reached the
Registry on 3 Ju1y,