2017-UNAT-773

2017-UNAT-773, Ali

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

UNAT found no error in the UNRWA DT finding that the application was not receivable ratione temporis. UNAT rejected the Appellant’s contention that UNRWA DT erred in that it examined the timeliness of his application sua sponte, without it having been raised by the Respondent, holding that the competence of UNRWA DT to review the observance of the statutory deadlines for filing an application can be exercised even if the parties or the administrative authorities do not raise the issue because it constitutes a matter of law and the UNRWA DT Statute prevents UNRWA DT from receiving a case which is not receivable. UNAT held that the UNRWA DT properly considered the facts and the applicable statutory law and jurisprudence in arriving at its decision that the application was not receivable as it was time-barred. UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the UNDT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision not to select him for a post. UNRWA DT dismissed the application as non-receivable ratione temporis, for not having been filed within the time limit of 90 days of receipt of the response to his request for decision review.

Legal Principle(s)

Strict adherence to filing deadlines assures the timely hearing of cases and rendering of judgments; it is irrelevant whether a deadline is missed by several minutes, several hours, or several days. UNRWA DT may examine the timeliness of an application sua sponte, without it having been raised by the parties, as it constitutes a matter of law and the UNRWA DT Statute prevents UNRWA DT from receiving a case that is not receivable.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on merits

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.

Full Judgment

Applicants/ Appellants

Ali

Entity

UNRWA

Case Number(s)

2017-1054

Tribunal

UNAT

Registry Location :

New York