Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT Held or Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT Pronouncements
Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that it could find no fault with the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT¡¯s conclusion that the application was not receivable ratione materiae, which accorded with Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT¡¯s jurisprudence. Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that, since that ground was sufficient to affirm the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT judgment and to dismiss the appeal, there was no need for it to determine whether the application before Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT challenged a specific implied administrative decision on the part of Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµICEF or whether the Appellant was merely making general complaints about Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµICEF¡¯s failure to protect him. Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT judgment.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Applicant contested Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµICEF¡¯s alleged failure in its obligations ¡°to provide safety and protection to the functional immunity¡± of staff members. Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT rejected the application as not receivable ratione materiae.
Legal Principle(s)
For an implied administrative decision, the date of notification is the date upon which the staff member knew or reasonably should have known of the decision he or she contests.