2024-Ģ��ƵAT-1466

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

The Ģ��ƵAT rejected the new arguments and evidence submitted to the Appeals Tribunal for the first time that were aimed to show that Mr. El-Anani had not read the attachment of the e-mail that communicated the disciplinary sanction.

The Ģ��ƵAT confirmed that, the two Microsoft Outlook notification records acknowledged by Mr. El-Anani indicated that the contested decision had been delivered to and read by him on 28 March 2023 and that he was therefore required to file his application with the Ģ��ƵDT by no later than 26 June 2023. Since Mr. Al-Anani did not file the application until 28 June 2023, two days past the 90-day deadline, his application was rendered time-barred.

The Ģ��ƵAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the Ģ��ƵDT Judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

A former staff member contested the imposition on him of the disciplinary measure of separation from service with compensation in lieu of notice and without termination indemnity.

In Judgment No. Ģ��ƵDT/2023/074, the Ģ��ƵDT found Mr. El-Anani��s application not receivable ratione temporis, as the application had not been submitted timeously.

Mr. El-Anani appealed.

Legal Principle(s)

New arguments and evidence submitted to the Appeals Tribunal for the first time without filing a motion providing exceptional circumstances in advance are not admissible.

The date a decision is received constitutes an objective standard, regardless of whether the recipient knows it, reads it, or opens the attachment with it.

Unspecified international law or domestic law is not the applicable legal framework for applications before the Ģ��ƵDT.

Notifications of administrative decisions are valid even if communicated during a staff member��s annual leave.

E-mails sent outside working hours to staff members are considered received on the day sent.

The right to receive legal assistance does not guarantee the right to be represented by OSLA.

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

Fouad Moustafa El-Anani

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement