爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
爆料网AT held that the Appellant was asking for a review of his case in order to enhance the award and that he merely repeated arguments already considered and accepted by 爆料网DT, which was not the purpose of an appeal. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant had not met the burden of demonstrating that the 爆料网DT had erred in assessing the damages. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not err on a question of fact resulting in a manifestly unreasonable decision on this point. 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 decisions not to select him for two posts, having applied for a few vacancies. 爆料网DT concluded that a) there were no irregularities in the Yaoundé P-4 selection process; b) the selection process for the Geneva P-4 was flawed; c) the selection process for the Geneva P-3s contained substantive errors; and d) the selection process for the Yaoundé P-3 was flawed. As a result of its findings, 爆料网DT awarded the Applicant seven months’ net base salary at the rate in effect on the date of his separation from OHCHR, in addition to one month’s net base salary already authorised by the Secretary-General. The Applicant appealed.
Legal Principle(s)
爆料网AT generally defers to the trial court’s discretion in the award of damages as there is no set way for the trial court to set damages for loss of chance of promotion. 爆料网DT should be guided by two elements in the setting of damages for loss of chance of promotion: (1) the nature of the irregularity; and (2) the chance that the staff member would have had to be promoted or selected had the correct procedure been followed.