2013-UNAT-331, Faraj
UNAT held that, given the written instructions provided to the Appellant, it was completely understandable that he proceeded to request again the review of the contested decision. UNAT held that UNRWA DT erred when it found that he ought not to have done so and could not claim to have been legitimately misled as to the appeals procedure. UNAT held that UNRWA鈥檚 holding that the Appellant should have known the applicable legal framework and filed his appeal on time was unsustainable. UNAT noted that the Commissioner-General did not dispute the Appellant鈥檚 claim that the UNRWA Area Staff Rules...