爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
爆料网AT held that there was no basis for receiving the Appellant’s motion for additional pleadings (such as exceptional circumstances), that the motion raised no new or compelling arguments and, accordingly, dismissed the motion. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT correctly concluded that the application was time-barred and not receivable as a result of the Appellant’s failure to file his application within the established time limits. 爆料网AT noted that the Appellant had been provided two opportunities to make his case before 爆料网DT and on both occasions, he failed to provide the information. 爆料网AT held that failing to provide the information to 爆料网DT, and then seeking to provide 爆料网AT with an explanation for the delay, amounted to an attempt to have a de novo hearing of his application. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant failed to satisfy the requirements of Article 2(1) of the 爆料网AT Statute and he had not identified any errors or failure of jurisdiction by 爆料网DT to warrant reversal of the judgment. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Applicant contested the disciplinary measure of separation from service, with compensation in lieu of notice but without termination indemnity, which was imposed for misconduct in the form of attempted theft. 爆料网DT found that the application was not receivable because it was time-barred as a result of the Applicant’s failure to file his application within the established time limits and more than one year after the statutory deadline.
Legal Principle(s)
It is not the function of 爆料网AT to hear a de novo application.