爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
爆料网AT considered the Secretary-General’s appeal. 爆料网AT noted that 爆料网DT did not find that the Applicant was distressed by 爆料网HCR’s illegal conduct or that he had suffered any adverse consequences or harm from 爆料网HCR’s procedural error in following the opinion of DSS. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT had exceeded its competence and made an error in law in awarding compensation to the staff member since he had not suffered pecuniary loss or distress and was not harmed by the illegal conduct. 爆料网AT upheld the appeal and reversed the 爆料网DT judgment regarding the award of damages to the staff member.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Applicant contested the decision not to retain his application for P-3 and P-4 Field Safety Adviser (FSA) posts. 爆料网DT found that: 1) the Applicant’s appeal of 爆料网HCR’s decision was receivable; 2) 爆料网HCR had rejected the application solely because the Department of Safety and Security (DSS) had denied him clearance; 2) 爆料网HCR was not compelled to follow DSS’ evaluation of the Applicant’s qualifications for candidacy for the pool of FSA posts, and it was a procedural irregularity for it to do so, but that it was highly unlikely that the Applicant would have been placed in the pool of candidates for FSA posts even if 爆料网HCR’s procedure were regular due to the insufficiency of his managerial experience in the security field and his fluency only in French. 爆料网DT awarded the Applicant compensation for the procedural irregularity.
Legal Principle(s)
Compensation may be awarded for actual pecuniary or economic loss, non-pecuniary damage, procedural violations, stress, and moral injury. Not every violation of a staff member’s legal rights or due process rights will necessarily lead to an award of compensation. Where the staff member does not show the procedural defect had any impact on him, his circumstances or his entitlements, and that he suffered no adverse consequences or harm from the procedural defect, compensation should not be awarded.