����AV

UNAT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. UNAT held that UNDT’s analysis of the receivability of the application was replete with factual and legal errors. UNAT held that UNDT had made an error of fact and law when it tolled the limitations period for seeking management evaluation for the period 23 June to 23 August 2011. UNAT held that tolling the limitations period for the two or three days of the Ombudsman’s assistance, which took place after the limitations period had expired, did not assist the staff member. UNAT held that there was no legal authority for UNDT to commence the running of the sixty-day limitation period from the end of the Ombudsman’s settlement negotiations, rather than from “the date on which the staff member received notification of the administrative decision to be contested”. UNAT held that UNDT’s approach exceeded its jurisdiction and competence in that it ignored the statutory prohibition against suspending or waiving the deadline for management evaluation set forth in Article 8.3 of the UNDT Statute. UNAT held that the staff member’s request for management evaluation was untimely, and his application was not receivable ratione materiae. UNAT granted the appeal and vacated the UNDT judgment.