Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT Held or Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT Pronouncements
Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT did not err in dismissing the application as not receivable ratione temporis. Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that there had been no new administrative decision (capable of resetting the deadlines), but merely a reiteration of the previously communicated original decision. Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that, with respect to the original decision, the Applicant did not file a request to Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT to suspend or extend the deadlines for filing her application to Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT, nor did she claim exceptional circumstances justifying a waiver of the time limits. Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT judgment.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Applicant contested the decision not to reimburse her registration or the parents¡¯ association fees as part of her education grant advance. Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT dismissed her application on the grounds that it was time-barred.
Legal Principle(s)
A staff member cannot reset the time limits for management evaluation by asking for a confirmation of an administrative decision that has been communicated to him or her earlier. A subsequent reiteration of a previously communicated decision, if it does not add anything different or material to the original decision, is not a new administrative decision triggering a new time limit for appeal.