51³Ô¹Ï

The Applicant claims that, by informing her that she would only be entitled to the long service step increment in August 2028 instead of August 2026, the Administration effectively made a new and separate administrative decision that is reviewable under the Tribunal’s jurisdiction.

The issue under challenge for the purpose of receivability was whether the communication sent to the Applicant on 19 September 2023 constituted a reviewable administrative decision.

The Tribunal found that there was no decision made by the Respondent in the 19 September 2023 correspondence that adversely affects the rights of the Applicant. The said email was merely a response to the Applicant’s query about how her unchanged 9 December 2022 sanction of deferment of eligibility for salary increment would be affected by the settlement reached in August 2023.

Ultimately, it was made clear, in answer to the Applicant’s query, that the deferment of her eligibility for long-service step until August 2028 was a mere consequence of the restoration of two steps in grade and of the implementation of the two years deferment of eligibility. In other words, the sanction the Applicant received of two years deferment of eligibility will count from the moment she becomes eligible for a salary increment. And, as a staff member already occupying the last step of her grade, this will only happen on August 2026, when she becomes eligible for the long-service step increment.

Accordingly, the Applicant had failed to establish that the alleged contested decision met the definition of a new administrative decision.

The Tribunal, therefore, decided to reject the application as not receivable.