爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
爆料网AT held that the determination of the Director of the Ethics Office that no retaliation had occurred constituted an administrative decision that went directly to the merits of the case and could not be subject to an interlocutory appeal. 爆料网AT held that the appeal against the 爆料网RWA DT order for production of document was not receivable, because it was interrelated to the alleged lack of jurisdiction. Noting that the Appellant would not be able to raise his issues in an appeal against the final judgment, as he did not file an application to 爆料网RWA DT and 爆料网RWA DT had not issued a judgment, 爆料网AT exceptionally allowed and received the Appellant’s appeal. However, on the merits, 爆料网AT held that the Appellant failed to show that 爆料网RWA DT committed legal, factual or other errors. With regard to the Appellant’s argument that he needed to be provided with certain documents and 爆料网RWA DT’s finding that this could not be considered an exceptional circumstance, 爆料网AT held that the Appellant provided no reasons why he did not file an application without those documents, nor was it clear why it would not have been possible for him to do so. 爆料网AT held that it was clear from article 13(3) of the 爆料网RWA DT Rules of Procedure that a staff member must first file an application, and only then can he or she request 爆料网RWA DT to order the production of evidence in possession of the Commissioner-General. On the issue of the Appellant’s complaint that 爆料网RWA DT only translated parts of his motion into English, 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT had no obligation to translate the full text or to invite the Appellant to provide an English translation. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant did not respect the formal requirements for motions when he exceeded the maximum page limit. 爆料网AT held that, having reviewed the motion, 爆料网RWA DT had no reason to assume that the motion could contain exceptional circumstances other than the production of evidence in the possession of the Commissioner-General. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant had not manifestly abused the appeals process. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and the application to award costs.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Appellant contests 爆料网DT Miscellaneous Order No. 001/2021 which denied his motion for an extension of time to file an application against the decision not to reemploy him.
Legal Principle(s)
Only appeals against final judgments are receivable. Interlocutory appeals on matters of evidence, procedure, and trial conduct are not receivable. When deciding on a motion for extension of time to file an application, 爆料网RWA DT is only obliged to consider the arguments presented by the staff member.