爆料网

Full and fair consideration

  • Central Review Body
  • Décision de sélection
  • Eligibility
  • Examen complet et équitable
  • Full and fair consideration
  • Interview
  • Selection decision
  • Standard of proof
  • Written test
    • Showing 71 - 80 of 238
    2014-爆料网AT-453, Rahman

    爆料网AT considered the appeals of both Mr Rahman and the Secretary-General. With respect to Mr Rahman’s appeal, 爆料网AT held that his non-selection for the D-2 post was lawful. 爆料网AT found that 爆料网DT very carefully examined the circumstances of Mr Rahman’s interview for the D-2 post and that Mr Rahman did not meet the burden of proof that he had been the victim of retaliatory acts during the selection procedure. 爆料网AT held that Mr Rahman was therefore not entitled to compensation for damages resulting from his non-selection. 爆料网AT found that 爆料网DT correctly held that the decision to reassign Mr Rahman to...

    2014-爆料网AT-425, Simmons

    Regarding the non-selection for the Programme Budget Officer post, 爆料网AT held that the Appellant had failed to produce sufficient evidence to prove the impropriety in the decision making. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant had also failed to put forward any specific evidence substantiating her claim of discrimination, bias, and retaliation to warrant a reversal of the 爆料网DT’s findings. Regarding the cancellation of the Administrative Officer post, 爆料网AT held that the Administration had provided sufficient evidence to show that the cancellation of the post was based on Organisational and budgetary...

    2014-爆料网AT-417, Luvai

    爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. 爆料网AT held that no reasonable or objective analysis of Mr Luvai’s submissions to management, prior to his application to 爆料网DT, regarding his non-selection for the posts could lead to a conclusion that the revocation of his firearm licence was sufficiently linked to the non-selection decisions such as to deem the matter as receivable by 爆料网DT. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT had erred in fact and law in deciding otherwise and that, in purporting to adjudicate on the revocation of Mr Luvai’s firearm licence, 爆料网DT exceeded its competence. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT...

    2014-爆料网AT-397, Finniss

    爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. 爆料网AT held that, given the open animosity and ill-feeling between the PCO and the staff member, the Administration should not have included the former in the interview panel. 爆料网AT held that the test for apparent bias applied by 爆料网DT was correct, regardless of whether a fair-minded observer, having considered the facts, would conclude that there was a real possibility that the interview panel was biased. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT was best placed to calculate on the evidence the appropriate level of compensation and found no reason to disturb the...

    2015-爆料网AT-603, Niedermayr

    爆料网AT held that it was disingenuous for 爆料网RWA to suggest that the Appellant’s transfer application was considered in the same manner as the two candidates who were selected from the roster. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT failed to properly exercise the jurisdiction vested in it and erred in law in failing to have regard to the Appellant’s due process entitlements. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT erred in law in relying on the authority of the Director of 爆料网RWA Affairs, Lebanon, to reject the Appellant’s application for assignment. 爆料网AT did not uphold the contention that the Appellant had a legitimate...

    2015-爆料网AT-547, Staedtler

    爆料网AT held that the Appellant’s argument that 爆料网DT exceeded its competence and committed an error in procedure, subjecting the parties to disparate treatment, lacked merit. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant failed to demonstrate what document or related facts he would have submitted that would have affected the outcome of the case if he had been given more time. Recalling the broad discretion of 爆料网DT to determine admissibility and weighing of evidence, 爆料网AT held that there was no merit in the Appellant’s submission that 爆料网DT erred in law and fact when it failed to draw the necessary inference from...

    2015-爆料网AT-540, Aliko

    On the basis that the Appellant did not raise claims under the 爆料网AT Statute, reargued the claims he presented to 爆料网DT and failed to explain how 爆料网DT erred in deciding his claims, 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not make any errors of law or fact in denying the Appellant’s application and concluding that the selection process was correctly followed, the candidate was fully and fairly considered and there was no bias or procedural flaw. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT properly refused to address the Appellant’s various claims of harassment on the ground that he failed to establish proof...

    2015-爆料网AT-536, Zhao, Zhang and Xie

    爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. With respect to the application of Section 1. 8(d) of ST/AI/1999/9 to Ms Xie, 爆料网AT clarified that the requirement, that the Hiring Manager must submit a written analysis indicating how the qualifications and experience of the recommended candidate are “clearly” superior to those of female candidates who were not recommended, refers to the final stage of the selection process, i. e. it is when making his or her final recommendation for the selection of a male candidate over a female candidate, to the head of department/office, authorized to...

    2015-爆料网AT-527, Dhanjee

    爆料网AT upheld the Secretary-General’s claim that the Hiring Manager more than minimally demonstrated that she gave the Appellant’s candidature full and fair consideration. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT properly applied the standard of judicial review to determine whether the Hiring Manager’s decision that the Appellant was not among the most qualified for the post was reasonable. 爆料网AT held there was no reason to reverse the findings of 爆料网DT. 爆料网AT noted that the Appellant merely repeated the arguments he made before 爆料网DT and expressed his disagreement with the findings of the Hiring Manager. 爆料网AT held that...

    2016-爆料网AT-707, Krioutchkov

    爆料网AT rejected the request that the Secretary-General produced the underlying job description for the post, to verify if a typing requirement had been introduced since the last revision, finding that it would be neither necessary nor useful for the fair and expeditious resolution of the case. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant had failed to demonstrate that the contested decision fulfilled objective criteria of 爆料网AT’s competence. 爆料网AT held that, considering that the test was to be taken online, with the Appellant being based in Bangkok and the test being administered from New York, it was normal to...