2018-Ģ��ƵAT-813

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵDT��s conclusion that the application was non-receivable ratione materiae was correct, since the Appellant had failed to challenge the Ģ��ƵTSO CHRO��s response, the original administrative decision of 6 May 2015, by requesting a management evaluation. Ģ��ƵAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the Ģ��ƵDT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision not to review any further his requests for compensation at the GS-5 level, prior to his retirement from Ģ��ƵTSO. Ģ��ƵDT held that the Applicant failed to timely file the claim that he should have been promoted to the GS-5 level and to challenge the Administration��s decision appropriately. Ģ��ƵDT rejected the application as not receivable.

Legal Principle(s)

The key characteristic of an administrative decision subject to judicial review is that the decision must ��produce direct legal consequences�� affecting a staff member��s terms and conditions of appointment. The date of an administrative decision is based on objective elements that both parties (Administration and staff member) can accurately determine. A staff member cannot reset the time for management evaluation by asking for a confirmation of an administration decision that has been communicated to him earlier. Neither can a staff member unilaterally determine the date of an administrative decision. Neither Ģ��ƵDT nor Ģ��ƵAT has jurisdiction to waive deadlines for the filing of requests for management evaluation or to grant any exceptions to it as it is a mandatory requirement pursuant to the Staff Rules.

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

Said

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement