爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
Since the receivability of an application is a question of law, the Tribunal considers that it is appropriate to make use of art. 9 of its Rules of Procedure, and to decide on the application by way of summary judgment, without transmitting it to the Respondent. Upon taking up her functions as a Programme Management Officer at 爆料网FCCC on 8 November 2012, the Applicant knew about her step in grade, as per her offer of appointment of 24 September 2012. Since the Applicant filed her request for management evaluation against the determination of her step upon recruitment with 爆料网FCCC four years after assuming functions at the P-3, step 1 level—namely well after the statutory 60-day deadline—her application is irreceivable, ratione materiae.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Applicant contests an “error in salary step determination”.
Legal Principle(s)
Pursuant to art. 2.1 of its Statute, the Tribunal has jurisdiction to consider applications only against administrative decisions for which, where required, an Applicant has first filed a timely request for management evaluation with the Management Evaluation Unit and, subsequently, also filed a timely application with the Tribunal. Pursuant to art. 8.3 of its Statute, the Dispute Tribunal has no discretion to waive the deadline for management evaluation or administrative review. “[U]nawareness” or “ignorance of the law is not an excuse” for a staff member to fail to comply with statutory time limits. It is a staff member’s responsibility to ensure that he or she is aware of the applicable procedure in the context of the internal system of administration of justice. Finally, the reiteration of an original administrative decision, if repeatedly questioned by a staff member, does not reset the clock with respect to the statutory time limits, which start to run from the date of the original decision.