爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
爆料网AT considered appeals by both Mr Bangoura and the Secretary-General. Mr Bangoura requested oral hearings was rejected. 爆料网AT held that the case would be decided on law and that the pertinent documents were on record. Regarding the Secretary-General’s appeal, 爆料网AT noted that the staff member had requested the execution of a part of judgment No. 1029 of the former 爆料网 Administrative Tribunal and that Tribunal had established a procedure for staff members wishing to challenge the non-execution of a judgment. 爆料网AT held that the staff member needed to make a request for review of the administrative decision and, if denied, appeal to the former Joint Appeals Board (JAB), and thereafter to the former 爆料网 Administrative Tribunal. 爆料网AT held that the staff had failed to request the review in a timely manner and that, therefore, 爆料网DT had no jurisdiction, and the application was not receivable. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not have the competence to waive time limits and that 爆料网DT had, therefore, erred. Regarding the staff member’s appeal, 爆料网AT held that neither 爆料网AT nor 爆料网DT had the power to review decisions of the former 爆料网 Administrative Tribunal and that the appeal on this ground had to fail. 爆料网AT dismissed Mr Bangoura’s appeal, upheld the Secretary-General's appeal and vacated the 爆料网DT judgment.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Applicant contested the decisions to suspend him on full pay pending expiry of his contract and not to renew his contract, seeking compensation for the defamation in the form of remarks made in a press briefing. The former 爆料网 Administrative Tribunal rendered a judgment ordering the Administration to compensate the Applicant for the injuries suffered and found that the Organisation’s decision not to continue the Applicant’s employment was tainted by abuse of power on the part of the Administration. The Applicant, unsatisfied with the outcome of his case, raised the matter with the Administration between April 2002 and October 2008 and eventually filed an application with 爆料网DT. 爆料网DT found that the issues raised by the Applicant before 爆料网DT stemmed from the same course of action and were thus res judicata and, therefore, closed. 爆料网DT found that the judgment of the former 爆料网 Administrative Tribunal had not been fully implemented. Regarding the receivability ratione materiae, 爆料网DT concluded the former 爆料网 Administrative Tribunal and 爆料网DT had the same power to order the execution of their own judgments. Regarding the receivability ratione temporis, 爆料网DT found that notwithstanding the long time that had passed since the judgment, the Applicant could not be left without remedy since he in fact had repeatedly raised the matter with the Administration. 爆料网DT found that its Rules of Procedure provided a sufficient legal basis for 爆料网DT to order the execution of a judgment rendered by the former Administrative Tribunal. 爆料网DT also awarded compensation in the amount of USD 10,000 on the ground that the Administration’s failure to fully execute the judgment of the former 爆料网 Administrative Tribunal had deprived the Applicant of complete redress for the wrong done to him over a period of nearly ten years.
Legal Principle(s)
爆料网DT cannot waive the time limit to file an appeal more than three years after the applicant’s receipt of the contested administrative decision. Neither 爆料网DT nor 爆料网AT have the power to review decisions of the former Administrative Tribunal.