爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
爆料网AT considered all the grounds of the appeal and held that the issue of whether the Appellant’s application was pre-screened by a Human Resources Officer was irrelevant to determine whether his candidature received full and fair consideration. 爆料网AT held that the main issue for its determination was whether, at the time of application, the Inspira system had provided all of the correct options to the Appellant. 爆料网AT held that this was a factual determination which, without relevant evidence, could not be made. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT failed to enquire as to what options were available in the Inspira system. 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT’s finding that Inspira did not reflect the variety of the educational systems of all the Member States equally and that therefore the Appellant had not been afforded full and fair consideration was not supported by the facts. 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网DT erred on a question of fact which resulted in a manifestly unreasonable decision. 爆料网AT upheld the appeal, vacated the 爆料网DT judgment, and remanded the matter back to 爆料网DT for additional findings of fact.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
Following a previous application to 爆料网DT and the corollary judgment, which was appealed to 爆料网AT, this matter was remanded to 爆料网DT. 爆料网DT concluded that the Applicant’s application had not been afforded full and fair consideration and that, as a result, his exclusion from the recruitment process was unlawful. 爆料网DT considered that the Applicant’s request for compensation for loss of opportunity to have been fully compensated and rejected his claim for moral damages on grounds that he did not meet the requisite standard of proof.
Legal Principle(s)
Without the relevant evidence, a factual determination cannot be made.