51³Ô¹Ï

UNDT/2011/091

UNDT/2011/091, Patterson

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

He filed his request for administrative review on 2 December 2008 and his application before the Tribunal on 13 January 2010. The Tribunal found that the Applicant was first informed of the contested decision, in writing, on 5 February 2008, and that he also received written reiterations of the same decision in March and April 2008. The Tribunal found that the Applicant failed to request administrative review of the decision not to renew his contract within the applicable time limit and that the Tribunal was proscribed, under Costa 2010-UNAT-036, from waiving it. The Tribunal found that, even if it had the power to waive this deadline, the Applicant failed to demonstrate that this was an exceptional case warranting a waiver. The Tribunal further found that, even if the Applicant’s request for administrative review had been filed timeously, the application would still not have been receivable due to his failure to file an appeal with the Joint Appeals Board (prior to 1 July 2009) or a timeous application with the Dispute Tribunal (after 1 July 2009), or to demonstrate exceptional circumstances such as to warrant a waiver of the applicable time limits. Outcome: The application was rejected as not receivable.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision not to renew his contract beyond 31 March 2008.

Legal Principle(s)

Reiteration of administrative decision: Reiterations of the same administrative decision do not reset the deadlines for appealing it.Administrative review, time limits: Under Costa 2010-UNAT-036, the Tribunal does not have the power to waive or suspend the time limits for requests for administrative review or management evaluation.Exceptional circumstances, waiver of time limits: With respect to informal resolution of disputes, it is envisaged by the provisional Staff Rules that deadlines for the filing of an application with the Tribunal may be extended only in cases in which such informal resolution is carried out through the Office of the Ombudsman. Attempts to informally resolve the matter directly with management, without involvement of the Office of the Ombudsman, generally will not amount to an exceptional circumstance.

Outcome

Dismissed as not receivable

OAJ prepared this case law summary for informational purposes only. It is no official record and should not be relied upon as an authoritative interpretation of the Tribunals' rulings. For the authoritative texts, please refer to the judgment or order rendered by the respective Tribunal. The Tribunals are the only bodies competent to interpret their respective judgments, as provided under Article 12(3) of the UNDT Statute and Article 11(3) of the UNAT Statute. Any inaccuracies in the publication are the sole responsibility of OAJ, which should be contacted directly for any correction requests. To provide comments, don't hesitate to get in touch with OAJ at oaj@un.org.

The judgment summaries were generally prepared in English. They were translated into French and are being reviewed for accuracy of the translation.