2017-UNAT-773, Ali
UNAT found no error in the UNRWA DT finding that the application was not receivable ratione temporis. UNAT rejected the Appellant’s contention that UNRWA DT erred in that it examined the timeliness of his application sua sponte, without it having been raised by the Respondent, holding that the competence of UNRWA DT to review the observance of the statutory deadlines for filing an application can be exercised even if the parties or the administrative authorities do not raise the issue because it constitutes a matter of law and the UNRWA DT Statute prevents UNRWA DT from receiving a case which is not receivable. UNAT held that the UNRWA DT properly considered the facts and the applicable statutory law and jurisprudence in arriving at its decision that the application was not receivable as it was time-barred. UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the UNDT judgment.
The Applicant contested the decision not to select him for a post. UNRWA DT dismissed the application as non-receivable ratione temporis, for not having been filed within the time limit of 90 days of receipt of the response to his request for decision review.
Strict adherence to filing deadlines assures the timely hearing of cases and rendering of judgments; it is irrelevant whether a deadline is missed by several minutes, several hours, or several days. UNRWA DT may examine the timeliness of an application sua sponte, without it having been raised by the parties, as it constitutes a matter of law and the UNRWA DT Statute prevents UNRWA DT from receiving a case that is not receivable.