Judgment No. 182
Decision
1. The Director-General's decision dated 7 September 1970, by which he refused to delete from the appraisal report the words: "Nous souhaitons que le Dr Glynn puisse user de son autorité pour faire signer différents plans d'opération par le gouvernement de l'Ouganda, dans le cadre des directives établies au Bureau régional", is quashed.
2. The remainder of the complainant's claims is dismissed.
Consideration 3
Extract:
The function of the performance report is "to evaluate past performance and conduct and not to give directives for the future."
Keywords
performance report; purpose
Consideration 3
Extract:
The complainant complains of certain words used in a performance report: "[T]he facts as they appear in the [submissions] show that there was no act or omission by the complainant which could prompt any special directive for the future, let alone any criticism of the past."
Keywords
performance report; rebuttal; judicial review
Consideration 3
Extract:
"The Tribunal will not normally entertain complaints about the contents of appraisal reports; it is essential to their value that the supervisor should be granted great freedom of expression and normally, if there be any errors of judgement on his part, they can be sufficiently remedied by the incorporation in the appraisal report of the staff member's point of view."
Keywords
competence; work appraisal; performance report; rebuttal; supervisor; judicial review; discretion
Consideration 3
Extract:
"The Tribunal will not normally entertain complaints about the contents of appraisal reports [...] but in the circumstances of this case the Tribunal feels bound to conclude that the words complained of were inserted in the report under a total misconception of the situation and that justice requires that they should be expunged."
Keywords
work appraisal; performance report; rebuttal; judicial review; application for quashing; mistaken conclusion; elements
| 
