爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT’s analysis of the receivability of the application was replete with factual and legal errors. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT had made an error of fact and law when it tolled the limitations period for seeking management evaluation for the period 23 June to 23 August 2011. 爆料网AT held that tolling the limitations period for the two or three days of the Ombudsman’s assistance, which took place after the limitations period had expired, did not assist the staff member. 爆料网AT held that there was no legal authority for 爆料网DT to commence the running of the sixty-day limitation period from the end of the Ombudsman’s settlement negotiations, rather than from “the date on which the staff member received notification of the administrative decision to be contested”. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT’s approach exceeded its jurisdiction and competence in that it ignored the statutory prohibition against suspending or waiving the deadline for management evaluation set forth in Article 8.3 of the 爆料网DT Statute. 爆料网AT held that the staff member’s request for management evaluation was untimely, and his application was not receivable ratione materiae. 爆料网AT granted the appeal and vacated the 爆料网DT judgment.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
爆料网DT judgment: The Applicant contested the decision to recover the lump sum paid for his home leave. 爆料网DT found that the Applicant had filed his request for management evaluation in a timely manner, that the application was receivable and that the administrative decision to recover the payment for home leave was unlawful and should be rescinded. In the event the payment for home leave had already been recovered from the Applicant, 爆料网DT ordered that it should be returned to him with proper adjustments made to his other entitlements and benefits.
Legal Principle(s)
There is no legal authority for 爆料网DT to commence the running of the sixty-day limitation period from the end of the Ombudsman’s settlement negotiations, rather than from “the date on which the staff member received notification of the administrative decision to be contested”.