爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
As a preliminary matter, 爆料网AT dismissed the appeals of two staff members who were not a party to the proceedings before the 爆料网DT and had no standing. On the merits, 爆料网AT held that there was a reviewable administrative decision within the meaning of Article 2(1)(a) of the 爆料网DT Statute. 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT erred finding that the announcement by the USG/DGACM dated 8 April 2021 that the daily workload of translators would be increased to 5.8 pages and of self-revisers to 6.4 pages, was not an appealable administrative decision for the purpose of Article 2(1) of the 爆料网DT Statute. 爆料网AT held that, applying the test set out in its pertinent jurisprudence, the announcement contained all the necessary components to give rise to legal consequences for the Appellants. 爆料网AT held that the announcement contained information which affected the rights of the staff members in question given that it was being clearly communicated to them that changes were going to be made to their workload conditions and also it conveyed the final and unequivocal decision to that effect. 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT erred in law and in fact when it decided the announcement was not a final decision by the Administration, but only a preparatory step towards it. 爆料网AT held that Appellants suffered negative consequences at the material time the contested announcement was made to them on 8 April 2021. The future launch of the implementation of the announced administrative measures did not detract from the finality of the impugned announcement. 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT erred further in its subsequent determination that the request for management evaluation was premature on the basis that there was no appealable administrative decision. 爆料网AT held that the Appellants’ application was receivable ratione materiae and ratione temporis. 爆料网AT held that the since the 爆料网DT Judgment only addressed issues of receivability, the case had to be remanded to 爆料网DT for consideration on the merits pursuant to Article 2(3) of the 爆料网AT Statute. 爆料网AT granted the appeal, reversed the 爆料网DT Judgment and remanded the case to 爆料网DT for a trial on the merits.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Appellants, staff members of the Department of General Assembly and Conference Management (DGACM), challenged a unilateral change in individual workload standards for translation and self-revision. 爆料网DT dismissed their applications as not receivable ratione materiae.
Legal Principle(s)
A statutory burden is placed upon an applicant to establish that the administrative decision in issue is in non-compliance with the terms of his or her appointment or contract of employment; such a burden cannot be met where the applicant fails to identify an administrative decision capable of being reviewed, that is, a specific decision which has a direct and adverse impact on the applicant’s contractual rights. An appealable administrative decision is a decision whereby its key characteristic is the capacity to produce direct legal consequences affecting a staff member’s terms and conditions of appointment. In order to be considered an appealable administrative decision, what matters is that the administrative measure must have a present and direct adverse impact on the terms and condition of employment and not the potential of a future injury. The date of an administrative decision is based on objective elements that both parties can accurately determine. There is no explicit requirement for written notification as a prerequisite to contest an administrative decision. If there is no written notification, it is incumbent on the body reviewing the matter to consider whether the circumstances surrounding the verbal communication still constitute notification. Although the implementation of an administrative decision is, at times, an indicator of its finality, it is not one of the requisite key characteristics of an appealable administrative decision.