爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
爆料网AT noted that, despite its Registry’s request for the Appellant to file an appeal brief, the Appellant failed to do so. 爆料网AT noted that the Appellant was given the opportunity to improve his performance through the further extension of his appointment for an additional six months, but his performance had still not improved. 爆料网AT held that there was no error in the conclusion of 爆料网RWA DT that both the initial decision to extend the Appellant’s probationary period and the subsequent decision not to confirm his appointment were in compliance with his letter of appointment and 爆料网RWA’s regulatory framework. 爆料网AT held that the appeal had no merit. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网RWA DT judgment.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
爆料网RWA DT judgment: The Applicant contested the decisions to extend his probationary period and not to confirm his appointment (for poor performance). 爆料网DT dismissed the applications.
Legal Principle(s)
An appellant has the burden of satisfying 爆料网AT that the judgment he or she seeks to challenge is defective. It follows that the appellant must identify the alleged defects in the judgment and state the grounds relied upon in asserting that the judgment is defective.