Ãå±±½ûµØ

UNDT/2021/143

UNDT/2021/143, Mirella

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

Whether candidates for a Job Opening possess all required criteria is subjected to an assessment entrusted to each hiring manager based on an evaluation of each candidature pursuant to secs. 7.4 and 7.6 of ST/AI/2010/3. Contrary to the Applicant’s allegation, the hiring manager did not use new criteria but provided elements, that were taken into consideration in the assessment process, to come up with a reasoned and objectively justifiable decision aimed to select among a high number of applicants those to be shortlisted. Knowledge of several internal candidates in a D-1 recruitment process involving several candidates who are senior managers is not tantamount to bias in the selection recommendation process. Consequently, the Tribunal rejects the application in its entirety.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

Non-selection to a D-1 post at UNODC.

Legal Principle(s)

In selection and appointment matters: 1) The Administration enjoys broad discretion and the Tribunal’s consideration is limited to whether the procedure laid down in the Staff Regulations and Rules was followed, and whether the staff member was afforded full and fair consideration. 2) There is a presumption of regularity concerning the performance of official acts. It is incumbent on applicants to allege and provide evidence of the flaws identified, and the presumption of regularity can be rebutted by evidence of a failure to follow applicable procedures, bias in the decision-making process, and consideration of irrelevant material or extraneous factors in a 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
Mirella
Entity
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry Location :
Date of Judgment
Judge(s)
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type