2016-惇蹋厙AT-610

惇蹋厙AT Held or 惇蹋厙DT Pronouncements

惇蹋厙AT rejected the request for an oral hearing finding no need for further clarification of the issues. 惇蹋厙AT held that the Appellant failed to identify the grounds for his appeal, considering it defective. 惇蹋厙AT agreed with 惇蹋厙RWA DT that the Appellant had not complied with Staff Rule 111.3, which prescribes that the staff member is required to appeal to the JAB within thirty days. 惇蹋厙AT held that 惇蹋厙RWA DT＊s conclusion that the application was not receivable did not present any errors of law or fact. 惇蹋厙AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision to terminate his employment. 惇蹋厙RWA DT dismissed the application as not receivable ratione temporis.

Legal Principle(s)

Left deliberately blank.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on merits

Outcome Extra Text

No relief ordered.

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 惇蹋厙DT Statute and Article 11(3) of the 惇蹋厙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

Rahman

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement