Ãå±±½ûµØ

UNDT/2021/052

UNDT/2021/052, Krioutchkov

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

While the schedule set for the written assessment was probably inconvenient for the Applicant. However, he did not even attempt to provide a reason, neither when he was notified of the assessment’s schedule nor in his application, why it was not possible for him to take the test. He simply asked for the test to be rescheduled to coincide with the working hours at his location. The reason provided by the Administration for not being able to accommodate different schedules, namely the avoidance of leaks, is fair and reasonable.Therefore, the Applicant’s decision not to participate in the selection process was his own and, as per Loeber, he estopped himself from contesting the process’ outcome. The Applicant failed to provide evidence of bias.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

Decision not to select the Applicant for a position of Russian Reviser with DGACM.

Legal Principle(s)

The Administration has broad discretion in matters of staff selection. In reviewing such decisions, the Dispute Tribunal must assess whether the applicable law was applied in a fair, transparent, and non-discriminatory manner. The Dispute Tribunal’s role is not to substitute its decision for that of the Administration. By refusing to participate in an interview because of a belief that the panel was biased while offering no evidence of such bias, the applicant had estopped himself from challenging the outcome of the selection procedure

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
Krioutchkov
Entity
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry
Date of Judgement
Judge(s)
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type
Applicable Law