ILO is a specialized agency of the United Nations
ILO-en-strap
Site Map | Contact français
> Home > Triblex: case-law database > By thesaurus keyword > express decision

Judgment No. 1223

Decision

1. THE TRIBUNAL SETS ASIDE THE IMPUGNED DECISION OF 19 JUNE 1991 CONFIRMING THE DECISION NOT TO APPOINT THE COMPLAINANT TO THE POST ANNOUNCED IN VACANCY NOTICE/NOTICE OF COMPETITION CE-90-AT/35 AND THE APPOINTMENT OF MR. XAVIER FRON TO THE POST.
2. EURCONTROL SHALL PAY THE COMPLAINANT 100,000 BELGIAN FRANCS IN COSTS.

Consideration 20

Extract:

"True, a staff member may not assert any right to promotion and the choice of the successful applicant is at the discretion of the administration, which alone may appraise the organisation's interests. Yet the exercise of discretion is subject to restrictions in law and the Tribunal will to that extent review the decision: see for example Judgment 1016 [...]. So the staff member has undeniably the right to file an internal appeal or a complaint with the Tribunal if he believes that the appointment to a vacancy he has applied for is improper."

Reference(s)

ILOAT Judgment(s): 1016

Keywords

complaint; receivability of the complaint; cause of action; case law; promotion; appointment; competition; candidate; internal candidate; vacancy notice; judicial review; discretion; limits; organisation's interest; refusal; right

Consideration 30

Extract:

The complainant, a Eurocontrol official, challenges the rejection of his application to a post of head of division and the appointment of an external candidate to that post. He alleges that the recruitment procedure was unlawful. "The Tribunal will not interfere in drafting a notice of vacancy or comparing candidates who respond to the notice. But for Eurocontrol to open a competition for serving officials and then change the terms of recruitment sub rosa so as to deny them any real chance of success was in breach of the duty of trust and fairness the organisation owes its staff."

Reference(s)

ILOAT Judgment(s): 1016

Keywords

due process; equal treatment; good faith; organisation's duties; appointment; competition; candidate; vacancy notice; judicial review; discretion

Considerations 33-34

Extract:

The complainant, a Eurocontrol official, challenges the rejection of his application to a post of head of division and the appointment of an external candidate to that post. "To refuse promotion to an official who has duly applied for a post in answer to a notice of vacancy does amount to a 'decision adversely affecting' him [...] it is immaterial whether the decision is express [...] or implied in the preference for another applicant."

Reference(s)

ILOAT Judgment(s): 1016

Keywords

decision; express decision; implied decision; cause of action; promotion; refusal

Considerations 33 to 36

Extract:

The complainant, a Eurocontrol official, is challenging the rejection of his application to a post of head of division and the appointment of an external candidate to that post on the grounds that the decision was not substantiated. "Mutual trust between organisation and staff requires that in such circumstances the applicants should be properly informed of the decision and of the reasons for it. of course the content of the obligation [...] will depend on the sort of decision that has been taken. [...] The principle holds good: the organisation has a duty to state the reasons for the decision, that being an essential condition for proper defence of the official's rights. The staff member is therefore entitled to be given any information necessary for that purpose."

Reference(s)

ILOAT Judgment(s): 1016

Keywords

decision; duty to substantiate decision; right to reply; organisation's duties; duty to inform; promotion; competition; purport; purpose; refusal



 
Last updated: 19.08.2020 ^ top