¹ú²úAV

UNAT agreed with UNDT and its conclusion that the application was not receivable ratione materiae. UNAT noted that a request for management evaluation must be submitted prior to bringing an application before UNDT. UNAT further noted that, even if the Management Evaluation Unit (MEU) had failed to resolve the Appellant’s complaints about the contested decision, she still had the opportunity to file a timely application with UNDT for judicial review after she receive the response from the MEU but had chosen not to do so. UNAT held that UNDT exceeded its competence and jurisdiction in addressing the merits of the claim. UNAT held that because the UNDT had no competence and jurisdiction to make any factual findings and reach any legal conclusions on the merits of the Appellant’s claims, the correctness of such improper findings and conclusions could not be the basis of an appeal. UNAT held that UNDT did not err in denying the Appellant’s request for confidentiality and that her other claims on appeal had no merit, therefore it did not need to address them. UNAT dismissed the appeal.