¹ú²úAV

UNAT held that the Appellant did not demonstrate any errors in the UNDT’s finding that her application was filed one day late and was out of time. UNAT held that it is the receipt of the management evaluation response which triggers the time limit for filing an application to the UNDT, and not the moment when the staff member or her legal representative could reasonably be assumed to have taken notice of the response. In concurrence with the UNDT Judgment, UNAT held that the Appellant had not presented any exceptional circumstances to justify waiving the time limits and that any such circumstances must normally exist when the time limit runs out. UNAT held that being ill at the time of receiving the management evaluation response is ordinarily insufficient to demonstrate exceptional circumstances. UNAT held that, contrary to the UNDT Judgment, there was no difference between the two applications filed by the Appellant because they raised identical legal issues, noting that the Appellant could not circumvent the provisions in the Staff Rules and the UNDT Statute by filing an application in which she requested to postpone the implementation of a disciplinary sanction to a later date. UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the UNDT Judgment.