爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
爆料网AT held that, when the Appellant contested before 爆料网AdT his separation from the Organisation, he should have also submitted the request for payment of a termination indemnity, to be able to collect it if he did not succeed in the first part of his application. 爆料网AT held that the decision of the Management Evaluation Unit to consider the Appellant’s request not receivable as time-barred was correct. 爆料网AT held that, even though the Appellant revisited the issue of his separation on several occasions under the old system, he might have been misguided into believing that he could bring the matter before 爆料网DT. 爆料网AT upheld the appeal in part and vacated in part the 爆料网DT judgment as to the award of litigation costs against the Appellant.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Applicant contested the decisions not to renew his contract and not to pay him termination indemnity. 爆料网DT dismissed the application. 爆料网DT recalled the Former Administrative Tribunal’s (爆料网AdT) judgment No. 1232 (2005) and determined that all issues reviewed by the 爆料网AdT were res judicata. 爆料网DT found that the application contained the same facts and raised the same issues as the three previous applications with 爆料网AdT. 爆料网DT found that the Applicant had abused the proceedings and decided to award costs against him, as a matter of principle, though he was no longer a staff member and it might be difficult, if not impossible, to recover those costs from him.
Legal Principle(s)
Left deliberately blank