爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
爆料网AT did not accept the argument that there was no evidence to indicate that the Appellant received the letter communicating the outcome of the management evaluation on 14 July 2011, noting that 爆料网DT relied on the Appellant’s statement to ascertain that date. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant failed to show any error on 爆料网DT’s part. 爆料网AT held that the Secretary-General rightly submitted that the deadline for the Appellant to file an application with 爆料网DT was 12 October 2011, notwithstanding any ambiguity as to when she actually received the management evaluation response and the appeal failed on that ground. 爆料网AT noted that the Appellant repeated the same arguments that she made before 爆料网DT. 爆料网AT held that all the alleged separate decisions the Appellant raised were either covered under the original request, time-barred themselves or not decisions subject to challenge, and therefore that 爆料网DT properly rejected them. On the issue of the Appellant’s claim regarding separation while on service-incurred sick leave, 爆料网AT noted the finding by 爆料网DT that the issue of whether her sickness was service-incurred was pending before the Advisory Board on Compensation Claims (ABCC) and as such, any challenge to this issue before 爆料网DT, or 爆料网AT, was premature. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
爆料网DT judgment: The Applicant contested the decision to terminate her contract due to the abolition of her post. 爆料网DT dismissed her application as not receivable ratione temporis since she failed to contest that decision within the time limit.
Legal Principle(s)
It is within the competence of 爆料网DT to consider all the evidence presented by both parties and to determine the weight to attach to such evidence. 爆料网AT defers to the determination of facts by 爆料网DT and only interferes if satisfied that 爆料网DT considered irrelevant matters or ignored relevant matters placed before it by the parties. It is for an appellant to show how 爆料网DT erred in its conclusion, by demonstrating that its findings are not supported by the evidence or that they are unreasonable.