爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT committed an error of law. 爆料网AT held that the record did not support the finding that the Appellant was notified for the purposes of Staff Rule 11.2(c) during her June 2014 meetings (or any previous ones) with the effect of triggering the time limits thereunder for her request for management evaluation. 爆料网AT noted that the minutes upon which 爆料网DT based its finding were unsigned, undated, and not shared with the Appellant at the time. 爆料网AT noted that the meetings of June 2014 did not have the aim of notification of the administrative decision of the non-renewal of her appointment, but rather were intended to help her identify new job opportunities. 爆料网AT held that there was no other corroborating evidence from that time or proximate thereto, contrary to what was suggested by 爆料网DT. 爆料网AT held the 爆料网DT finding based on the minutes was incompatible with good practice and insufficient to conclude that the Appellant had been notified of the decision. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant received notification of the contested decision on 26 August 2014 in the form of an interoffice memorandum. 爆料网AT rejected the Appellant’s assertion of a violation of ST/AI/1998/9. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred in law when it determined that the Appellant’s request for management evaluation was late. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant’s application was receivable ratione materiae. 爆料网AT vacated the 爆料网DT judgment and remanded the case to 爆料网DT for full consideration on its merits by another judge.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Applicant contested the decision not to renew her fixed-term appointment. 爆料网DT dismissed the application as not receivable ratione materiae for failure to request management evaluation within the requisite statutory period.
Legal Principle(s)
A staff member’s knowledge of a decision is not necessarily the same thing as a staff member receiving notification of a decision.