Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT Held or Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT Pronouncements
Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT considered the appeal. Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT noted that while only final judgments of the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT are appealable, exceptions may be made when Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT has clearly exceeded its jurisdiction or competence regarding interlocutory orders. Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that an order denying an application for suspension of action does not constitute Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT exceeding its jurisdiction. Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT further noted that Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT correctly found that it had no jurisdiction to grant the application under Article 10(2) of the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT Statute. Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the appeal was not receivable ratione materiae.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Applicant contested the decision of the Department for General Assembly and Conference Management to separate him upon the expiration of his fixed-term appointment and to not renew his appointment. He also filed an application for suspension of action and interim measures pending judicial review of the contested decision. Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT denied the Applicant¡¯s requests.
Legal Principle(s)
Generally speaking, only final judgments of the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT are appealable but exceptions may be made when Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT has clearly exceeded its jurisdiction or competence regarding interlocutory orders. An order denying an application for suspension of action cannot be considered to be a case in which the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT clearly exceeded its jurisdiction.