爆料网

2011-爆料网AT-141

爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements

爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not err in law or in fact in its assessment that the issue before it was the amount of compensation. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT’s approach in considering the Appellant’s prospects of success was entirely reasonable in the particular circumstances of the case. 爆料网AT held that it was not the function of 爆料网DT or 爆料网AT to take on the substantive role with which the interview panel was charged and to find that the Appellant was the only qualified candidate. 爆料网AT recalled that the jurisdiction vested in 爆料网DT is to review alleged procedural deficiencies and to rectify any which are found. 爆料网AT found no error in the approach adopted by 爆料网DT in its determination on the issue of compensation. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant did not establish any grounds meriting a reversal of the 爆料网DT’s findings. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested the decision not to select him. The Secretary-General acknowledged that a flawed selection procedure had occurred and awarded him six months’ net base salary. 爆料网DT, limiting itself to the issue of adequacy of compensation, found that the compensation was adequate and dismissed the application.

Legal Principle(s)

The burden of satisfying 爆料网AT that a judgment of 爆料网DT is defective rests with the appellant. The jurisdiction vested in 爆料网DT is to review alleged procedural deficiencies and, if they are established, to apply the statutory remedy it deems appropriate to rectify such deficiency in all the circumstances.

Outcome

Appeal 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 爆料网DT Statute and Article 11(3) of the 爆料网AT 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
Frohler
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry
Date of Judgement
President Judge
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type