爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
爆料网AT refused the Appellant’s motion for additional pleadings on the basis that exceptional circumstances were not demonstrated. 爆料网AT held that, contrary to the Appellant’s reasoning, fact-finding panels do not fall in the category of technical bodies under Staff Rule 11. 2(b), nor has the Secretary-General designated fact-finding panels established under ST/SGB/2008/5 as technical bodies. 爆料网AT upheld the 爆料网DT’s finding that the request for management evaluation was a mandatory first step in the judicial process. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant did not apply for management evaluation as required and, as a result, her application was not receivable. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and upheld the 爆料网DT judgment.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Applicant contested the decision to close the case after an investigation of her complaint of prohibited conduct against two staff members and the decision not to grant her compensation. 爆料网DT dismissed the application as not receivable as the Applicant had failed to request management evaluation of the contested decision.
Legal Principle(s)
Neither the 爆料网AT Statute nor its rules provide for an appellant to file an additional pleading after the respondent has filed his answer. Fact-finding panels do not fall in the category of technical bodies under Staff Rule 11. 2(b).