爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT judgment was not manifestly unreasonable in concluding that the date upon which the Appellant was on notice that he had received a response from the Management Evaluation Unit (MEU) or that it was his responsibility to read the MEU response as soon as possible. On the question of whether 爆料网DT erred in law and/or failed to exercise its jurisdiction in declining to consider the case on the merits, 爆料网AT held that, in the absence of a prior written request for a suspension or waiver of the time limit for filing his application, 爆料网DT was not competent to consider the issue. Accordingly, 爆料网AT held that there was no error of law or failure of jurisdiction on the part of 爆料网DT. 爆料网AT held that the absence of any prior written request for a suspension or waiver of the applicable time limit rendered moot the Appellant’s argument that there were exceptional circumstances, but that, nevertheless, there was nothing in the arguments advanced by the Appellant to persuade 爆料网AT that there existed exceptional circumstance. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant had failed to persuade it that there was any merit in his appeal. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Applicant contested the decision to transfer him to Vienna. 爆料网AT found the application not to be receivable.
Legal Principle(s)
In the absence of a prior written request from the Appellant for a suspension or waiver of the time limit for the filing of his or her application, 爆料网DT is not competent to consider the application.