Judgment No. 4673
Decision
The complaint is dismissed.
Summary
The complainant challenges the decision to terminate her appointment during her extended probation period.
Judgment keywords
Keywords
receivability of the complaint; probationary period; complaint dismissed
Consideration 12
Extract:
The Tribunal has repeatedly emphasised the importance of the strict observance of applicable time limits when challenging an administrative decision. In Judgment 4103, consideration 1, the Tribunal stated the following in this regard:
“The complaint is irreceivable as the complainant failed to exhaust all internal means of redress in accordance with Article VII, paragraph 1, of the Tribunal’s Statute. The complainant’s grievance was time-barred when he submitted it [...] on 23 December 2014. Under Article VII, paragraph 1, of the Tribunal’s Statute, a complaint will not be receivable unless the impugned decision is a final decision and the complainant has exhausted all the internal means of redress. This means that a complaint will not be receivable if the underlying internal appeal was not filed within the applicable time limits. As the Tribunal has consistently stated, the strict adherence to time limits is essential to have finality and certainty in relation to the legal effect of decisions. When an applicable time limit to challenge a decision has passed, the organisation is entitled to proceed on the basis that the decision is fully and legally effective (see Judgment 3758, under 10 and 11, and the case law cited therein).”
(See also Judgment 4426, consideration 9, in this regard.)
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3758, 4103, 4426
Keywords
receivability of the complaint; failure to exhaust internal remedies; late appeal
Consideration 13
Extract:
As the Tribunal also recalled in Judgment 4184, consideration 4, the time limits for internal appeal procedures and the time limits in the Tribunal’s Statute serve the important purposes of ensuring that disputes are dealt with in a timely way and that the rights of parties are known to be settled at a particular point of time (see also, to the same effect, Judgment 3704, considerations 2 and 3). The rationale for this principle is that time limits are an objective matter of fact and strict adherence to them is necessary to ensure the stability of the parties’ legal relations.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3704, 4184
Keywords
receivability of the complaint; internal appeal; late appeal
Consideration 16
Extract:
The complainant cannot validly claim that, in the circumstances of the case, she was misled by the Organisation with regard to exercising her right of appeal. Although the Tribunal’s case law recognises that there are some exceptions to the general principle that the time limits set for internal appeal procedures must be strictly observed where an organisation has misled a staff member, depriving her or him of the possibility of exercising a right of appeal in violation of the principle of good faith (see [...] Judgment 4184, consideration 4), those exceptions are not applicable in the present case.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4184
Keywords
internal appeal; time limit; late appeal
Consideration 16
Extract:
As the Tribunal has repeatedly stated, officials are expected to know the rules and regulations to which they are subject and ignorance of the law is no excuse (see Judgments 4324, consideration 11, and 4032, consideration 6).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4032, 4324
Keywords
duty to be informed; ignorance of the rules; duty to know the rules
| 
