¹ú²úAV

2015-786

Showing 1 - 1 of 1

UNAT found that UNDT did not address the staff members’ requests for an extension of time and that instead had converted sua sponte the requests for an extension of time into “incomplete†applications, adjudging the applications not receivable. UNAT held that UNDT had not afforded the staff members the opportunity to file an application. UNAT held that UNDT had exceeded its competence and jurisdiction and committed errors in procedure when it determined that the requests for an extension of time were the “equivalent†of applications; inferred that the statements in the requests for an...