UNDT/2015/047, Belkhabbaz
The Tribunal rejected all of them as irreicevable: first, it found that the application concerning a decision to refer allegations of misconduct made against the Applicant to the Assistant Secretary-General, Office of Human Resources Management, was time-barred, as the Applicant had not filed her application within 90 calendar days of the expiry of the 45-day response period for management evaluation. Secondly, the Tribunal considered that the Applicant missed the 60-day deadline to request management evaluation for three other administrative acts she wished to contest, two of them being identical. Finally, the Tribunal found that neither of the two remaining acts the Applicant wished to contest, namely the mere intention to place a note on her official status file and the “motivation” of the decisions made against the Applicant, were constitutive of an administrative decision subject to being appealed.
The Applicant challenged a number of decisions relating to a preliminary investigation in a disciplinary matter.
Receivability ratione temporis: A reply to a request for management evaluation issued beyond the 90-day time limit to file an application before the Tribunal does not reset a new 90-day deadline to file an application. Confirmative decision: The reiteration of an 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. Receivability ratione materiae: The failure to comply with the statutory time limit to request management evaluation of a decision renders the challenge of that decision before the Tribunal irreceivable.Administrative decision: An expression of intention to perform an administrative act is not constitutive of a challengeable administrative decision as per the established definition, as it has no direct legal effect on an Applicant’s rights.