爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
The 爆料网AT found that the relief sought in the application concerned an issue not previously raised before the 爆料网DT or the 爆料网AT, being the recovery of an amount already paid as an admissible expense on a sliding scale.
The 爆料网AT held that there was nothing in the meaning or scope of the prior Judgment that was unclear or ambiguous, the terms of the order were clear. The 爆料网AT noted there was no need to interpret the prior Judgment to clarify its meaning, nor were there reasonable doubts about what constituted the 爆料网AT’s decision or the reasons for it.
The 爆料网AT was of the view that there was also no clerical, arithmetical or accidental error or slip in the prior Judgment that required correction.
The 爆料网AT dismissed the application for interpretation and correction of Judgment No. 2022-爆料网AT-1279.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Secretary-General filed an application for interpretation and correction of a prior 爆料网AT Judgment No. 2022-爆料网AT-1279. In the prior case, the Tribunals had examined whether certain fees for the attendance of the staff member’s child at a university were admissible for computing his education grant. The 爆料网AT ordered the Secretary-General to accept the “computer fee” and the “new student fee” as admissible expenses.
The Secretary-General requested guidance in the form of an interpretation of the amount payable to the staff member and, if appropriate, to issue a correction to the prior Judgment.
Legal Principle(s)
An application for interpretation of a prior Judgment may only be admitted if the meaning or scope of the Judgment is unclear or ambiguous.
While the Appeals Tribunal will interpret its judgments and modify remedies awarded to correct obvious mistakes, it is not its task to provide guidance on the manner in which its orders are to be implemented or executed.