��ż���

The Tribunal is competent to raise a receivability issue on its own initiative, “whether or not it has been raised by the parties” (see O’Neill 2011-UNAT-182, para. 31). Under art. 8.1(c) of the Tribunal’s Statute, an application is receivable if an “applicant has previously submitted the contested administrative decision for management evaluation, where required”. Staff rule 11.2(a) requires that a staff member wishing to formally contest an administrative decision alleging non-compliance with his or her contract of employment or terms of appointment submit a request for a management evaluation as a first step. Pursuant to staff rule 11.2(c), a request for a management evaluation shall be submitted “within 60 calendar days from the date on which the staff member received notification of the administrative decision to be contested”. To determine the date by which a staff member must seek review of an implied decision, the Tribunal must “first establish the date on which the staff member knew or reasonably should have known of the implied decision” (see Chahrour 2014-UNAT-406, para. 31). The Tribunal recalls that “the reiteration of an original administrative decision, if repeatedly questioned by a staff member, does not reset the clock with respect to statutory timelines. Rather, time starts to run from the date on which the original decision was [notified]” (see Kerby 2020-UNAT-1064, para. 37). The authority to extend the 60-day statutory deadline for requesting management evaluation is reserved for the Secretary-General under staff rule 11.2(c). The Tribunal also wishes to point out that ignorance of the law cannot be invoked as an excuse to justify the failure to comply with a statutory deadline as “[i]t is the staff member’s responsibility to ensure that he or she is aware of the applicable procedure in the context of the administration of justice at the United Nations” (see Vukasovic 2016-UNAT-699, para. 14 Kissila 2014-UNAT-470, para. 24), including the applicable time limits.