2021-Ģ��ƵAT-1099

Ģ��ƵAT Held or Ģ��ƵDT Pronouncements

Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵDT erred in considering that the recruitment exercise was the same and the cancellation of RFR 104637 was just a preparatory step of the selection process because Ģ��ƵDT ignored the difference in the requirements and in the legal framework applicable to those very distinctive ways of contracting and in which each of these contracts is deployed. Ģ��ƵAT held that Ģ��ƵDT also erred in fact when it found that certain Ģ��ƵAT precedents were applicable to the present case because the facts in the present case are not materially identical to those in the cited Ģ��ƵAT precedents.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The decision to cancel the selection process for RFR 104637

Legal Principle(s)

A delicate balance must be struck between efficiency in the recruitment exercise and respect for the rights of the candidates. Even allowing the Administration a certain degree of discretion in canceling the RFR and issuing a new TJO, to consider Mr.; Ponce-Gonzalez��s application not receivable would impose upon him too much of a burden before he is able to contest his disqualification from the first selection exercise.

Outcome

Appeal granted

Outcome Extra Text

Appeal upheld Judgment No. Ģ��ƵDT/2020/079 vacated, and the case was remanded to Ģ��ƵDT for additional fact-finding and judgment on the merits

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

Antonio Ponce-Gonzalez

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement