51�Թ�

The parties disagreed as to the date the contested decision was notified to the Applicant and the Tribunal had to determine which of the communications triggered the running of the 60-day time limit to request management evaluation.; It was uncontested by the Applicant that he was informed, unequivocally, by his manager on 28 October 2015, that his contract was going to be terminated effective 31 January 2016 and that he was being placed on special leave with full pay as of 1 November 2015. He was also unequivocally informed on that date that he would no longer have access to his emails and shared drives, and that he had to clear his office.; In the letter of 28 October 2015, even if it was handed over to him on 29 October 2015, the suppositions informing the decision conveyed on 28 October 2015 had not altered; clearly, the intention of that second written communication was not to revisit the earlier decision (Afeworki 2017-UNAT-794), communicated on 28 October 2015. Rather, that second communication dated 28 October 2015, assuming it was handed over to the Applicant only on 29 October 2015, was a mere reiteration of what had been notified to him orally, and in writing through the aide mémoire, on 28 October 2015.; Therefore, and independently from the question whether some of the sub-decisions contested by the Applicant were accessory to the decision to terminate his fixed-term appointment, the Tribunal found that by filing his request for management evaluation on 28 December 2015, the Applicant was late by one day. The application was therefore not receivable ratione materiae.; The Tribunal also noted that the decision to communicate his name to external stakeholders as a staff member who was not selected, as well as the decision to install an automatic reply message unilaterally on his email from 28 October to 2 December 2015, informing that he had left the Organization, are no administrative decisions for the purpose of art. 2.1(a) of the Tribunal’s Statute.