Íæż½ã½ã

The Applicant made an application for strike out, summary judgment and transfer of the case to UNDT New York or Geneva on the grounds that there was a conflict of interest for various reasons. The Tribunal issued Order No. 28 refusing the requests for strike out, summary judgment and transfer and, in accordance with Article 19 of the UNDT Rules of Procedure (ROP), gave case management directives, which the Applicant was supposed to comply with by 4 March 2010 but he did not do so. Subsequent to the Tribunal issuing an Order to show cause, the Applicant informed the Tribunal that its interlocutory Order No. 28 was stayed because he had filed an appeal against it with the United Nations Appeals Tribunal (UNAT). The Tribunal issued two further orders, which explained at length: the importance of the Applicant complying with the Tribunal’s Order; the ramifications of non-compliance and gave the Applicant additional extensions of time within which to comply. The Applicant, however, asserted that he was prevented from complying with any orders in this matter pending a judgment on his appeal to UNAT. Due to the Applicant’s refusal to comply, the Tribunal decided to strike out his claims, which had earlier been consolidated.