爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
爆料网AT, applying Bertucci (2010-爆料网AT-062), rejected as not receivable an interlocutory appeal against 爆料网DT’s decision that the determination by the Ethics Office, that no retaliation occurred, constituted an administrative decision falling within 爆料网DT’s jurisdiction. The alleged lack of jurisdiction of 爆料网DT was not clearly established in this case: the question of whether there was an administrative decision required adjudication on the merits of the case and could not be the subject of an interlocutory appeal. 爆料网AT further held that the appeal against 爆料网DT’s order for production of the OIOS report was not receivable because it was interrelated with the alleged lack of jurisdiction. As previously held in Tadonki No. 1 (2010-爆料网AT-005, para. 11), interlocutory appeals on matters of evidence, procedure, and trial conduct are not receivable. 爆料网AT accordingly dismissed the appeal.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Applicant contested the rejection of his request for an administrative review of the outcome of the investigation into his request for protection from alleged retaliation. 爆料网DT found that the decision of the Director of the Ethics Office that no retaliation occurred constituted an administrative decision and that the application was receivable. 爆料网DT also ordered disclosure of the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) report into a contract the Applicant entered into with a new employer, after notification that his contract with 爆料网MIK would not be renewed due to a reduction in posts.
Legal Principle(s)
An interlocutory appeal is receivable where 爆料网DT clearly exceeded its jurisdiction or competence. The general rule that only appeals against final judgments are receivable does not apply when 爆料网DT dismisses a case on the grounds that it is not receivable under Article 8 of the 爆料网DT statute, as the case cannot proceed any further and there is a final judgment in effect.