2017-��AT-804

��AT Held or ��DT Pronouncements

��AT held that in failing to file an appeal brief contesting the decision taken against her, the Appellant did not discharge her burden to demonstrate that the impugned judgment erred on a question of law or fact, resulting in a manifestly unreasonable decision. ��AT noted that there appeared to be an implied administrative decision when the Appellant did not receive any decision on her first written demand in 2011 and that that application also seemed not to be receivable ratione materiae. ��AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the ��DT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision not to grant her a Special Post Allowance (SPA). ��DT dismissed her application, finding that the Applicant had failed to make a claim seeking retroactive payment of the SPA in a timely manner. ��DT also addressed the merits of the case, stating that the Applicant had not given evidence to show that she continued to perform all of the high-level functions required to be entitled to such payment.

Legal Principle(s)

An appellant has the burden of satisfying ��AT that the judgment he or she seeks to challenge is defective and the appellant must identify the alleged defects in the judgment and state the grounds relied upon in asserting that the judgment is defective.

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 ��DT Statute and Article 11(3) of the ��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

Fitsum

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement