2011-UNAT-124, Appellant
UNAT held that the Appellant had failed to show how UNDT exceeded its jurisdiction or competence or failed to exercise its jurisdiction. UNAT held that the Appellant had not identified an error on a question of law. UNAT held that it had no reason to disagree with UNDT鈥檚 holding that no institutional prejudice, or retaliation, played a part in the non-renewal of the Appellant鈥檚 contract. UNAT noted that the decision to take the Appellant鈥檚 portfolio away from him had been taken before he had made any report of wrongdoing. UNAT noted that the Appellant鈥檚 non-selection for the 11 posts involved...