爆料网

Staff selection (non-selection/non-promotion)

  • Central Review Body
  • Décision de sélection
  • Eligibility
  • Examen complet et équitable
  • Full and fair consideration
  • Interview
  • Selection decision
  • Standard of proof
  • Written test
    • Showing 151 - 160 of 621
    2014-爆料网AT-445, Terragnolo

    爆料网AT preliminarily denied the Appellant’s motion to submit an amicus curiae brief. On the merits, 爆料网AT noted that the Board of Examiners found the Appellant to be one of 68 applicants who, although meeting the minimum requirements, were not deemed the most qualified and therefore not convoked to the examination. 爆料网AT held that the appeal did not identify any errors in the reasoning of 爆料网DT and found no basis for disagreeing with 爆料网DT. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeal and upheld the 爆料网DT judgment.

    2014-爆料网AT-439, Gusarova

    爆料网AT considered an appeal by the staff member and a cross-appeal by the Secretary-General. Regarding the cross-appeal of the Secretary-General on material damages, 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT was the body best placed to assess a candidate’s chance of selection for placement on the roster. 爆料网AT held that the fact that there were several candidates selected from the roster in the months following the roster approval was sufficient to underpin 爆料网DT’s assessment that the staff member’s chances were not in the realm of the speculative. 爆料网AT held that there was no merit in the Secretary-General’s cross...

    2014-爆料网AT-438, Benchebbak

    爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT had erred in deciding that the non-renewal of the staff member’s contract was unlawful. 爆料网AT held that the staff member was aware that a high school diploma was an essential qualification. 爆料网AT held that his contract was conditional upon him producing proof of this qualification. 爆料网AT noted that the staff member was also aware that the consequence of failing to satisfy this requirement was the non-renewal of his contract. 爆料网AT agreed with the Secretary-General’s submission that the decision not to renew was neither...

    2014-爆料网AT-433, Hersh

    爆料网AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT had correctly stated that even if it could be argued that the profile of the Broadcast Technology Officer (BTO P-4) post had changed due to the drafting of new Terms of Reference (TOR) by Ms Hermann, the only viable course of action in the circumstances for the purposes of filling it would have been a regular, competitive selection process and not a comparative review as happened in this case. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT was correct in finding that the so-called comparative review between Ms Hersh and Mr Tobgyal for the only post...

    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-416, Charles

    爆料网AT considered both the two appeals by the Secretary-General and two cross-appeals by Mr Charles in judgment No. 2014-爆料网AT-416. 爆料网AT held that that Section 9 of ST/AI/2010/3 was clear in giving the head of department/office the discretion to make a selection decision from candidates included in the roster. 爆料网AT held that it was not open to 爆料网DT to conclude that Section 9. 4 required the head of department/office to first review all non-rostered candidates before selecting a rostered candidate. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT erred in law in deciding that the appointment of the rostered candidates was...

    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-595, Survo

    爆料网AT considered an appeal by Mr Survo and an appeal by the Secretary-General. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT had not erred in the procedure, including in its findings regarding receivability. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT had not erred in law in relation to the matters raised by Mr Survo. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT had not erred on a question of fact such as to render the decision of 爆料网DT manifestly unreasonable. On the Secretary-General’s appeal of the Special Post Allowance (SPA) issue, 爆料网AT held that 爆料网AT had no primary legal or factual basis from which it could conclude that Mr Survo had properly sought management...