UNDT/2015/069, Survo

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The UNDT rejected the application as irreceivable, for he only requested management evaluation of the two decisions years after he knew, or should have reasonably known, of the Administration’s inaction.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the failure by the Administration to approve his workplans for the performance evaluation cycles 2010-2011 and 2011-2012.

Legal Principle(s)

Starting point for contestation time limits for implicit decisions: When an administrative decision has not been notified to the concerned staff member, he or she cannot unilaterally determine the date of the same decision; this date must be determined based on objective elements, which comes down to ascertaining when the staff member actually knew or should have reasonably known about the implied decision.

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.

Full judgment

Applicants/Appellants

Survo

Entity

ESCAP

Case Number(s)

UNDT/GVA/2015/103

Tribunal

UNDT

Registry

Geneva