爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
The 爆料网AT considered an appeal by Mr. Dorji.
The 爆料网AT found that the appeal was defective in that it failed to identify any of the five grounds of appeal set out in Article 2(1) of the Statute as forming the legal basis of the appeal. As the 爆料网DT correctly held, Mr. Dorji’s alleged coerced resignation and subsequent separation from the Organization occurred in March and April 2019. Mr. Dorji’s request for management evaluation thereof was filed outside the 60-day statutory time limit by more than two years, on 25 June 2021.
The 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed Judgment No. 爆料网DT/2021/120.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
Mr. Dorji contested the decision to accept his resignation.
The 爆料网DT, by Judgment No. 爆料网DT/2021/120, summarily dismissed the application, finding that it was non-receivable ratione materiae.
Legal Principle(s)
A party appealing a judgment of the 爆料网DT is unlikely to succeed in having the judgment reversed, modified or the case remanded to the 爆料网DT unless the appeal challenges the impugned judgment on one or more of the grounds referred to in Article 2(1)(a) to (e) of the 爆料网AT Statute.
An application shall be receivable if the applicant has previously submitted the contested decision for management evaluation where required. The 爆料网AT has repeatedly and consistently strictly enforced the time limits for filing applications and appeals. Strict adherence to filing deadlines assures one of the goals of the new system of administration of justice: the timely hearing of cases and rendering of judgments.
The 爆料网AT has also consistently held that staff members are presumed to know the Regulations and Rules applicable to them. It is the staff member’s responsibility to ensure that he or she is aware of the applicable procedure in the context of the administration of justice at the United Nations. Ignorance cannot be invoked as an excuse.