Judgment No. 1646
Decision
1. The Tribunal sets aside the decision of 5 July 1996 confirming the one of 27 September 1995 rejecting the complainant's application for the post announced in notice No. 8-1995 and Mrs. P.'s appointment to that post.
2. His other claims are dismissed.
Considerations 6 and 10
Extract:
"When an organisation chooses to hold a competition it must abide by its written rules and by the general principles set forth in the case law, particularly insofar as they govern the formal side of the process. [...] As the Appeal Board gathered from the personal records of the candidates on the preselection panel's list, [the successful candidate] had neither the university degree nor the experience that the notice required."
Keywords
procedure before the tribunal; applicable law; case law; due process; international civil service principles; organisation's duties; patere legem; staff regulations and rules; professional experience; appointment; competition; candidate; vacancy notice; degree; criteria; selection procedure
Consideration 11
Extract:
"The defendant contends on the strength of the complainant's personal file and his supervisors' reports on his conduct and performance that he was not up to the job anyway. That is neither here nor there. The Union has neglected the cardinal rule of any process of selection: the chosen candidate must have at least the qualifications stipulated in the notice."
Keywords
procedure before the tribunal; personal file; due process; organisation's duties; appointment; competition; candidate; vacancy notice; qualifications; criteria
| 
