Ãå±±½ûµØ

UNDT/2019/183

UNDT/2019/183, Belsito

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The Tribunal found that the cancellation of the selection exercise in question on the ground that there was a breach of confidentiality in the recruitment process was a reasonable exercise of discretion. The Tribunal rejected the Applicant’s claim that the decision was tainted by gender discrimination as such claim was not supported by evidence. Regarding the second selection process, the Tribunal found that the Applicant was afforded a full and fair consideration as he was recommended as a suitable candidate, was ranked second in preference, and was not selected as the first recommended candidate accepted the offer. The Tribunal rejected the Applicant’s claim that the non-selection decision was tainted by gender discrimination.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

The decision to cancel the selection process. The decision not to select the Applicant for the the same post in the second selection process.

Legal Principle(s)

The Dispute Tribunal’s scope of review is limited in matters of staff selection. The Administration has broad discretion in matters of staff selection. In reviewing such decisions, it is the role of the Tribunals to assess whether the applicable regulations and rules have been applied and whether a candidate has received full and fair consideration, discrimination and bias are absent, proper procedures have been followed, and all relevant material has been taken into consideration. The Dispute Tribunal s role is not to substitute its decision for that of the Administration. There is a presumption that official acts have been regularly performed in selection and promotion exercises. If the management is able to even minimally show that the a candidature was given a full and fair consideration, then the presumption of law stands satisfied. Thereafter, the burden of proof shifts to the applicant who can rebut the presumption of regularity by showing through clear and convincing evidence that he or she was denied a fair chance of selection. The Administration is not under an obligation to pursue a recruitment procedure once begun and that it is within the discretionary authority of the Administration to terminate a recruitment procedure and/or to initiate a new one for sound reasons, such as on account of irregularities which occurred in the recruitment process.

Outcome
Dismissed on 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 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
Belsito
Entity
Tribunal
Registry Location :
Date of Judgment
Judge(s)
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type