±¬ÁÏÍø

±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the Appellant had failed to submit his appeal to the AJAB in accordance with the time limits defined in ICAO¡¯s Field Service Staff Rules. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that a submission of an appeal of the administrative decision to AJAB was a mandatory step in the first-instance procedure. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that it did not have jurisdiction or competence to address the merits of the substantive claims of an appellant which were not considered first by the AJAB as the ¡°neutral first instance process¡±. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT further held that the Appellant had failed to comply with a mandatory step of the first instance...

±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the requirements for ±¬ÁÏÍøAT jurisdiction were fulfilled. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that the appeal to AJAB was time-barred and also, as the Appellant failed to request administrative review under ICAO Staff Rule 111. 1(5), the appeal to AJAB was not receivable ratione materiae. ±¬ÁÏÍøAT held that a later request by the Appellant was not relevant to the question of receivability because although the later request was phrased differently, it was based on the same factual and substantive situation that had already been assessed under her previous, unsuccessful request for review of her post description...