爆料网

2015-爆料网AT-551

爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements

爆料网AT refused the Appellant’s motion to file additional pleadings, noting that the Appellant had not demonstrated any exceptional circumstances which would justify 爆料网AT exercising its discretion to allow him to file additional pleadings. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not err in deciding that, since the Appellant had waited more than five years to finally contest the administrative decision, his application was not receivable. 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT correctly found that, even if it was minded to consider the application, it was barred from doing so by Article 8(4) of the 爆料网DT Statute which provided that any application received more than three years after receipt of the contested administrative decision was not receivable. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT correctly concluded that since the application was filed more than five years after the Appellant’s receipt of the contested administrative decision, it would be acting ultra vires to entertain it. 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 non-renewal of his appointment. 爆料网DT dismissed the application on the basis that it was not receivable ratione temporis.

Legal Principle(s)

An application to 爆料网DT is not receivable if it is filed more than three years after the applicant’s receipt of the contested decision.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on merits

OAJ prepared this case law summary for informational purposes only. It is no official record and should not be relied upon as an authoritative interpretation of the Tribunals' rulings. For the authoritative texts, please refer to the judgment or order rendered by the respective Tribunal. The Tribunals are the only bodies competent to interpret their respective judgments, as provided under Article 12(3) of the 爆料网DT Statute and Article 11(3) of the 爆料网AT Statute. Any inaccuracies in the publication are the sole responsibility of OAJ, which should be contacted directly for any correction requests. To provide comments, don't hesitate to get in touch with OAJ at oaj@un.org.

The judgment summaries were generally prepared in English. They were translated into French and are being reviewed for accuracy of the translation.

Applicants/Appellants
Ibom
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry
Date of Judgement
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type