2019-Ģ��ƵAT-920

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵDT erred in finding that the erroneous requirement for a perfect command of English vitiated the entire recruitment process, noting that it was a typographic error and corrective measures were taken by conducting a manual review of the personal history profile of each candidate. Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵDT erred in its finding that the selection process was unlawful and lacked transparency. Ģ��ƵAT held that the need for the factual determination of all of the evidence related to the roster, placement, and removal of candidates required that the instant case be remanded to the Ģ��ƵDT. Ģ��ƵAT vacated the Ģ��ƵDT judgment and remanded the case to Ģ��ƵDT for full consideration of its merits by another judge.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision to exclude his candidature from a job opening. Ģ��ƵDT concluded that the decision was vitiated by an unpublished eligibility requirement that was not in the job opening and the erroneous requirement that the candidate should have a perfect command of English. Ģ��ƵDT ordered rescission of the decision and in-lieu compensation for the loss of opportunity to be selected for the position and its negative impact on reaching the mobility requirement and his career development.

Legal Principle(s)

Ģ��ƵAT may remand a case to Ģ��ƵDT for rehearing where there is a need for factual determination.

Outcome

Appeal granted

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 Ģ��ƵDT Statute and Article 11(3) of the Ģ��ƵAT 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.

Applicants/Appellants

Krioutchkov

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement