Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT Held or Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT Pronouncements
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT found that Mr. Flekal, by consenting to the referral of the harassment claim on 3 March 2024, for managerial action, had essentially waived the right to pursue a remedy before the Tribunals for the lack of an investigation into his complaints of harassment, including bullying. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT noted that under the relevant technical instruction of the Department of Internal Oversight Services, bullying is not a separate category of misconduct, it is considered a kind of harassment.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT noted that Mr. Flekal had also waived his ¡°abuse of power¡± claim because it was not pled in his application to the Dispute Tribunal, nor in the Request for Decision Review. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA DT therefore erred in considering that claim, as it had no ground to extend its jurisdiction to the abuse of power complaint of Mr. Flekal.
The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT found that there was no illegality and there could be no compensation for harm and denied Mr. Flekal¡¯s claims for damages.
Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed Judgment No. Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA/DT/2025/037 with partly different reasoning.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
Former Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA staff member contested the Agency¡¯s decision not to investigate his complaint of alleged abuse of power and harassment by his supervisor.
In Judgment No. Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA/DT/2025/037 the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA Dispute Tribunal dismissed the application.
The former staff member appealed.
Legal Principle(s)
It is the staff member¡¯s responsibility to make sure that the decision he/she disagrees with was effectively and clearly included in his/her request for decision review prior to bringing his/her case before the tribunal. In the absence of a clear request to review a certain decision, the tribunal lacks legal power to extend its jurisdiction thereto.