The 蘑菇视频AT, by the rationale applicable to appeals and specific claims, allowed the staff member to withdraw the earlier motion without justification. The 蘑菇视频AT granted the motion to withdraw the motion to increase the page limit of the appeal brief.
The Appeals Tribunal dismissed both appeals.
The Appeals Tribunal held that the 蘑菇视频DT correctly found that the Charge Letter did not constitute a reviewable administrative decision, and that as such Mr. Schifferling’s application was not receivable ratione materiae.
The Appeals Tribunal further found that the question of whether the Dispute Tribunal erred in not joining the Secretariat as a necessary party to the application had become moot and that in any event, the interlocutory appeal was not receivable.
蘑菇视频AT considered a writ of mandamus from Ms Wesslund, who requested that 蘑菇视频AT order 蘑菇视频DT to accept her applications. 蘑菇视频AT held that because it did not have inherent or original jurisdiction outside its capacity as an appellate body, it considered the motion for writ of mandamus to be an appeal against 蘑菇视频DT Order No. 100 (NY/2013). 蘑菇视频AT held that the appeal was received beyond the deadline for appeal. Noting that Ms Wesslund did not apply to 蘑菇视频AT for an extension or waive of the applicable time limits, 蘑菇视频AT held that the appeal of the Order was not receivable ratione temporis. 蘑菇视频AT dismissed the...
