����AV

A respondent who neglects to take part in the proceedings by not filing a reply within 30 days of receipt of the application may be readmitted by leave of the Tribunal only. The respondent in such a case is solely and effectively excluded by his own negligence to file a reply in time. He is not excluded by the Tribunal but by the operation of law. By his preposterous claim that the Registrar and the Judge owed him a duty to remind him of his obligations to his client, the Respondent’s Counsel, sought, in the Tribunal’s view, to provide an excuse for his own incompetence and lack of diligence. It must be clearly stated that no Counsel is owed a duty by the Registrar to be reminded about the necessity of complying with procedural rules. Article 10(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Tribunal does not require the Registrar to advise Counsel on the legal conduct of his/her case but only on the “formal requirements” of submitting a reply. Having filed a submission within the requisite time limit and titling it “Motion for Dismissal”, art. 10(2) did not require the Registrar to advise Counsel for the Respondent that he should have titled the document “Reply” and to have ensured that his legal arguments amounted to a Respondent’s Reply within the meaning of art. 10(1). The Applicant was not entitled to set a date arbitrarily on which the Respondent’s negative response would be presumed to be an implied administrative decision. The Applicant’s request for management evaluation was made out of time and under art. 8(3) of the Tribunal’s Statute, the Tribunal cannot suspend or waive the deadlines for management evaluation.Outcome:Judgment in favour of the Respondent.The Application is not receivable. In the circumstances, this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain it.