2023-UNAT-1327, Husein Taha Abu Heija
The UNAT held that in view of the case record, the contested administrative decision was the decision not to reclassify the staff member’s post, which was communicated to Appellant in a definitive and unambiguous response on 9 July 2019.
Subsequent letters to the Appellant were only reiterations of that decision. The UNRWA DT was correct to conclude that Appellant failed to submit a timely request for decision review as required prior to filing his application with the UNRWA DT, given that Mr. Abu Heija had not filed his request for decision review until more than a year after receiving the July 2019 decision.
The UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed Judgment No. UNRWA/DT/2021/064.
A staff member contested a decision of the UNRWA concerning the classification of his post under a new occupational health salary scale.
In Judgment No. UNRWA/DT/2021/064, the UNRWA DT concluded that the staff member had failed to submit a timely request for decision review and dismissed the application as not receivable ratione materiae.
The staff member appealed.
An appealable administrative decision is a decision whereby its key characteristic is the capacity to produce direct legal consequences affecting a staff member’s terms and conditions of appointment.
It is part of the duties and inherent powers of a Judge to adequately interpret and comprehend the application submitted and to identify what is being contested.
UNAT jurisprudence is clear that the request for decision review provides the Administration with the opportunity to reassess the situation and correct possible mistakes or errors. Neither the UNRWA DT nor the Appeals Tribunal may suspend or waive the deadline for requesting decision review.
A subsequent reiteration or reaffirmation of a previously communicated decision is not a new administrative decision triggering a new time limit for appeal.