accordance with Article 16 of the Treaty in as much as they are binding on the Respondent. Counsel for the Claimant further contended that all staff of the Secretariat are appointed on contract and in accordance with the Staff Rules and Regulations and the Terms and Conditions of Service of the Community pursuant to Article 70(2) of the Treaty. Counsel for the Claimant averred that after a number of processes which included a vacancy that occurred after resignation of one Mr. Ponziano Nyeko, the Claimant was appointed by the Council during its Meeting of 13th September, 2008 to the position of Project Accountant under Grade P2. Furthermore, Counsel for the Claimant added that the aforesaid appointment falls under category of Professional Staff as laid down in Regulation 18 of the Staff Rules and Regulations. Counsel then referred the Court to the Claimant’s Letter of Appointment as a Project Accountant under RISP funding, dated 29th September 2008 to demonstrate that it did not reflect the Council’s decision. In this regard, Learned Counsel pointed out that as per the Council Meeting Report dated 13th September 2008, the Claimant was not recruited under RISP. In support of his written submissions, Counsel for the Claimant referred the Court to some authorities to wit: Cheshire and Fifoot’s Law of Contract, 9th Edition by M.P Furmston published by London Butterworth 1976 No.7 where the learned author laid down that: CLAIM NO.1 OF 2012 Page 9

Sélectionner le paragraphe cible3