UNDT/2010/095

UNDT/2010/095, Rolland

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

Evaluation of candidates: The record appears to reflect a careful and comprehensive examination of the claims of the various applicants. There was no problematical analysis or conclusion that suggested that the process had gone awry or was anything other than proper. Failure to notify: Sec 9.5 of ST/AI/2006/3 provides that an unsuccessful interviewed applicant should be informed by the programme that they have not been selected or rostered. This was not done. The applicant suffered no loss or additional anxiety arising out of the inappropriate and discourteous way in which she became aware of her non-selection, but compliance with the specific obligations towards staff members in the appointment selection process is important and comprises a congeries of valuable rights of which it is a breach of contract to deprive a staff member. Outcome: The applicant was awarded nominal damages of USD500 for the failure to notify her of her non-selection. The application was otherwise dismissed.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

The applicant complains that she was denied full and fair consideration for promotion in relation to one of three P-5 positions for which she applied and was interviewed, but not recommended or selected. She did not receive notification from the programme manager of her non-selection but found out through informal means. The applicant said that there were procedural flaws which invalidated the selection process, including a failure to apply the qualities listed as desirable from the vacancy announcement (VA) and a failure to have a separate evaluation criteria document approved by the Central Review Body (CRB). She further contended that she was better qualified than some of the selected candidates and that a taking into account of her prior PAS reports, which was not done by the selection panel, would have showed this.

Legal Principle(s)

Tribunal’s role in promotion cases: An assessment of candidates in a promotion exercise involves a high degree of judgment and experience which will not be replicated by a judge. Unless there is some obvious anomaly or evidence that irrelevant material was taken into account, relevant material ignored, or of a mistake of fact or law, the Tribunal will not be able to conclude that the process was significantly flawed; it is not the Tribunal’s role to determine the outcome of a promotion or appointment process. It is necessary that accurate and fair records be maintained of what transpired so that a critical examination is possible. The extent to which the presence or absence of “desirable” qualities was significant needs to be evaluated in the context of the other attributes of the particular candidate. Panel failure to consider performance evaluation (PAS) reports: The mere fact that the applicant’s PAS would have led to a reasonable expectation that the panel would have evaluated here competencies more favourably does not justify the conclusion that its evaluation was mistaken or unreasonable.

Outcome
Judgment entered for Applicant in full or in part

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 UNDT Statute and Article 11(3) of the UNAT 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
Rolland
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry Location :
Date of Judgment
Judge(s)
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type