AV

UNDT/2022/119

UNDT/2022/119, Melbiksis

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The Applicant contests his non-selection and being found not suitable for the position advertised under JO 18186. He identified as the contested decision the Management Evaluation Unit's response dated 24 March 2021. However, a management evaluation response is not a judicially reviewable administrative decision. Accordingly, the application is not receivable ratione materiae. The above notwithstanding, the Tribunal recalls that it falls under its competence “to individualize and define the administrative decision impugned by a party and identify what is in fact being contested and so, subject to judicial review”. Therefore, “[i]t is the role of the Dispute Tribunal to adequately interpret and comprehend the application submitted by the moving party, whatever name the party attaches to the document, as the judgment must necessarily refer to the scope of the parties’ contentions”. Having examined the case record, the Tribunal considers that the Applicant is essentially contesting his non-selection for the position advertised via the aforementioned JO, which was the object of a first management evaluation request on 29 January 2021 of which he received a response on 24 March 2021. Art. 8 of the Dispute Tribunal’s Statute provides that the Applicant has 90 days from the management evaluation response to follow with an application before the Tribunal, or 90 days from the expiry of the relevant response period for the management evaluation if no response to the request was provided. Considering that the management evaluation response was issued on 24 March 2021, the Applicant had 90 days from that date to file an application before this Tribunal. This deadline expired on 22 June 2021. The instant application, however, was only filed on 9 September 2021. Accordingly, the application is not receivable ratione temporis.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contests the decision not to select him for the position of External Relations Officer in Pretoria (“JO 18186”).

Legal Principle(s)

 

Outcome
Dismissed as not receivable
Outcome Extra Text

 

OAJ prepared this case law summary for informational purposes only. It is no official record and should not be relied upon as an authoritative interpretation of the Tribunals' rulings. For the authoritative texts, please refer to the judgment or order rendered by the respective Tribunal. The Tribunals are the only bodies competent to interpret their respective judgments, as provided under Article 12(3) of the UNDT Statute and Article 11(3) of the UNAT Statute. Any inaccuracies in the publication are the sole responsibility of OAJ, which should be contacted directly for any correction requests. To provide comments, don't hesitate to get in touch with OAJ at oaj@un.org.

The judgment summaries were generally prepared in English. They were translated into French and are being reviewed for accuracy of the translation.