爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
The Appellant requested that the 爆料网DT judgment be set aside and that the case be remanded to 爆料网DT for a hearing de novo before a different judge. 爆料网AT agreed with the Appellant’s submission that the relevant statute or rules of procedure do not prohibit an applicant from providing testimony and serving as a witness in their own case. 爆料网AT noted that, while 爆料网DT was required to administer the declaration prescribed in Article 17(3) of the 爆料网DT RoP, 爆料网DT’s failure to do so was not an error serious enough so as to affect the decision of the case. Conversely, 爆料网AT found that 爆料网DT’s refusal to allow the Appellant to call expert evidence was a clear violation of her due process and held that this constituted an error in procedure, such as to affect the decision of the case. 爆料网AT allowed the appeal in part, set aside 爆料网DT’s judgment, and remanded the case to 爆料网DT for a hearing de novo before a different judge. Judge Weinberg de Roca partially dissented. Judge Weinberg de Roca’s partial dissent: Judge Weinberg de Roca noted that it is well within the competence of 爆料网DT to manage cases as it sees fit and concluded that the Appellant did not demonstrate how the procedure adopted affected or violated her due process rights.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Applicant contested the decision not to select her for a post. 爆料网DT dismissed her application and concluded that it had not been established that the Administration abused its discretion in the selection process or that the decision not to select her was based on an error of fact or a manifest error of judgment.
Legal Principle(s)
Left deliberately blank.