UNDT/2010/120, Ostensson
Section 5.5 of ST/SGB/2002/6 does not give the right to request the removal of a candidate’s name from the list of recommended candidates as an alternative to a request for clarification. Therefore, the selection process was procedurally flawed which gives a right to compensation. It is not the Tribunal’s competence to substitute the Administration’s decision to select between suitable candidates.
In 2007, the (now retired) applicant, a permanent staff member at the P-5 level, applied for a D-1 position. After the interview, the applicant, together with one other candidate, was included in the list of recommended candidates, which was submitted to the Central Review Body (CRB). The CRB found that the applicant did not fully meet all the established evaluation criteria. The CRB then requested that either the name of the applicant be removed from the list or clarifications be provided as to why he was considered as meeting all evaluation criteria. The PCO removed the applicant’s name from the list of recommended candidates, and the remaining other candidate was selected. In his application, the applicant holds the view that he was the only qualified candidate.
N/A
Rescission of the contested decision, as an alternative that the applicant be paid half of the difference between P-5 and D-1 net salary until date of retirement (10.5 (a) statute). Approximately 6 months’ salary as compensation (10.5 (b) statute).