2015-Ģ��ƵAT-551

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Ģ��ƵAT refused the Appellant��s motion to file additional pleadings, noting that the Appellant had not demonstrated any exceptional circumstances which would justify Ģ��ƵAT exercising its discretion to allow him to file additional pleadings. Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵDT did not err in deciding that, since the Appellant had waited more than five years to finally contest the administrative decision, his application was not receivable. Ģ��ƵAT held that the Ģ��ƵDT correctly found that, even if it was minded to consider the application, it was barred from doing so by Article 8(4) of the Ģ��ƵDT Statute which provided that any application received more than three years after receipt of the contested administrative decision was not receivable. Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵDT correctly concluded that since the application was filed more than five years after the Appellant��s receipt of the contested administrative decision, it would be acting ultra vires to entertain it. Ģ��ƵAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the Ģ��ƵDT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the non-renewal of his appointment. Ģ��ƵDT dismissed the application on the basis that it was not receivable ratione temporis.

Legal Principle(s)

An application to Ģ��ƵDT is not receivable if it is filed more than three years after the applicant��s receipt of the contested decision.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on merits

OAJ prepared this case law summary for informational purposes only. It is no official record and should not be relied upon as an authoritative interpretation of the Tribunals' rulings. For the authoritative texts, please refer to the judgment or order rendered by the respective Tribunal. The Tribunals are the only bodies competent to interpret their respective judgments, as provided under Article 12(3) of the Ģ��ƵDT Statute and Article 11(3) of the Ģ��ƵAT Statute. Any inaccuracies in the publication are the sole responsibility of OAJ, which should be contacted directly for any correction requests. To provide comments, don't hesitate to get in touch with OAJ at oaj@un.org.

The judgment summaries were generally prepared in English. They were translated into French and are being reviewed for accuracy of the translation.

Applicants/Appellants

Ibom

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement