Judgment 4552
134th Session, 2022
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to select him for the post of director of the Language Service.
Consideration 3
Extract:
[T]he complainant’s assertion that it is incomprehensible why an application from an external candidate was shortlisted whereas an application from an internal candidate is obviously stronger and ought therefore to have received the EPO’s special consideration, is based on circular reasoning, not on any tangible evidence submitted by the complainant.
Keywords:
external candidate; internal candidate; selection procedure;
Judgment 4529
134th Session, 2022
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests WHO’s decision to select Ms V. for the post of Proofreader (Spanish), at grade G-4, in WHO’s Headquarters’ Word Processing Centre.
Consideration 10
Extract:
[P]ersons already in the service of the Organization have priority only if their qualifications appear to be equal to those of other candidates (see, for example, Judgment 1954, consideration 7). In Judgment 3652, consideration 12, the Tribunal also recalled that:
“Similarly, it was stated in Judgment 2392, under 9:
‘It is well settled that preferences such as those mentioned [i.e. by reason of being an internal candidate and by reason of gender] must be given effect to where the choice has to be made between candidates who are evenly matched. On the other hand, they have no role to play where there is a significant and relevant difference between the candidates. [...]’”
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1954, 2392, 3652
Keywords:
criteria; internal candidate; selection procedure;
Judgment 3652
122nd Session, 2016
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant impugns two appointment decisions by the Director-General.
Consideration 12
Extract:
[The Tribunal] stated in Judgment 2392, under 9:
“It is well settled that preferences such as those mentioned [i.e. by reason of being an internal candidate and by reason of gender] must be given effect to where the choice has to be made between candidates who are evenly matched. On the other hand, they have no role to play where there is a significant and relevant difference between the candidates. […]”
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2392
Keywords:
external candidate; internal candidate;
Consideration 12
Extract:
[The Tribunal] relevantly stated as follows in Judgment 2712, under 5 and 6:
“5. The Tribunal has consistently held that an international organisation which decides to hold a competition in order to fill a post cannot select a candidate who does not satisfy one of the required qualifications stipulated in the vacancy announcement (see for example Judgments 1158, 1646 and 2584.)
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1158, 1646, 2584, 2712
Keywords:
external candidate; internal candidate;
Judgment 2859
107th Session, 2009
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"Regarding the allegation of unequal treatment between external and internal candidates, the Tribunal notes that as the situation of the former is different to that of the latter in fact and in law, there is no ground for that allegation."
Keywords:
candidate; equal treatment; grade; internal candidate; promotion;
Judgment 2647
103rd Session, 2007
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
An external candidate was appointed to the post the complainant had applied for. The complainant contends that, contrary to the Staff Regulations, the applications of candidates already in the Organization's service were not given priority of consideration over those of external candidates. "It is convenient to recall that the Tribunal held in Judgment 107, under 1, that:
'although the Organization is bound to have full regard to the qualifications and experience of persons already in its service, this does not mean that it must necessarily always appoint them in preference to outside applicants. If this privilege were automatically to be granted to the serving staff, the Organization might be led to take decisions contrary to its own interests, a situation which was certainly not intended by those who drafted the Staff Regulations. The position is that persons already in the service of the Organization have priority only if their qualifications appear to be at least equal to those of other candidates.'
Those principles were duly taken into account in the selection process, which was carefully and correctly conducted by the Organization, and while the qualifications and experience of the complainant are to be noted, they do not automatically give her a right of precedence over other candidates for the advertised post."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 107
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; competition; condition; decision; general principle; internal candidate; organisation's duties; organisation's interest; post; priority; procedure before the tribunal; professional experience; provision; purpose; qualifications; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 2392
98th Session, 2005
International Fund for Agricultural Development
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
The complainant was not selected for a post. She considers that she should have been given the preference because she was an internal candidate and by reason of her gender. "It is well settled that [such] preferences [...] must be given effect to where the choice has to be made between candidates who are evenly matched. On the other hand, they have no role to play where there is a significant and relevant difference between the candidates."
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; competition; difference; internal candidate; post; refusal; sex discrimination;
Judgment 2362
97th Session, 2004
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 8-9
Extract:
The complainant's candidacy to a vacant post was rejected. "She states that her immediate supervisor [had] received a minute from HRD, instructing her that in preparing her shortlist of candidates, priority should be given to internal candidates, then to those persons who had been working for the Office for an extended period on what are regarded as 'precarious' conditions, such as herself, and lastly to other external candidates. She contends that, contrary to the instructions in the minute, her supervisor reviewed all the candidates in order to prepare her shortlist, disregarding those priorities, thus rendering the selection decision null and void. [The Tribunal considers that] what is important, however, is that the recruitment procedure in the Staff Regulations and the terms of the vacancy notice were complied with. The priorities for shortlisting candidates were merely indicated in a minute from HRD."
Keywords:
appointment; breach; candidate; competition; information note; internal candidate; priority; procedure before the tribunal; refusal; staff regulations and rules; submissions; supervisor; terms of appointment; vacancy; vacancy notice;
Judgment 2336
97th Session, 2004
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"[T]he publication of the internal invitation for candidature presuppose[s] that the procedure for selecting candidates [...] be conducted in compliance with the general principles recalled in the case law and with rules established prior to the invitation for candidature and known to the candidates, such rules being designed to guarantee objectivity and transparency in order to ensure that all candidates stand the same chances."
Keywords:
case law; competition; duty to inform; equal treatment; general principle; internal candidate; internal competition; vacancy notice; written rule;
Judgment 2074
91st Session, 2001
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
The complainant applied for a post but was not selected. "The complainant claims the right of preference which is accorded, when candidates are equally competent, to internal applicants [...] In view of its objective, which is to secure the best possible employees for an organisation, equality of competence applies to all the abilities required of an employee, both professional and personal. The Secretary-General did not overstep his discretionary authority by concluding that the overall aptitude of the candidates was not equal. The plea must therefore fail."
Keywords:
candidate; competition; condition; discretion; executive head; internal candidate; no cause of action; organisation's interest; purpose; qualifications; refusal; right;
Judgment 1954
89th Session, 2000
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
The complainant unsuccessfully applied for a new post. She maintains that the candidate selected for the post had been considered as an internal candidate during the selection process, when in fact she was an external candidate. "The correct interpretation of Staff Regulation 4.4 is that persons already in the service of the organization have priority only if their qualifications appear to be equal to those of other candidates (see Judgment 107). Since the complainant was found not to be as well qualified as Ms P., she cannot rely on Regulation 4.4. "
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: PAHO STAFF REGULATION 4.4
ILOAT Judgment(s): 107
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; competition; internal candidate; priority; selection board; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1706
84th Session, 1998
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 16
Extract:
The complainant, placed on special leave without pay following an 'agreed termination' was a candidate in an internal competition. The Organization maintains that she was no longer a staff member at the moment of recruitment. "The Tribunal [...] holds that the 'agreed termination' did not in any way restrict her rights under the Staff Rules, while she remained a staff member, to preference over an outside male candidate in any future competition where qualifications were equal."
Keywords:
agreed termination; appointment; candidate; competition; internal candidate; priority; right; sex discrimination; special leave; staff regulations and rules; unpaid leave;
Judgment 1595
82nd Session, 1997
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
"Even if she were unqualified for the post the complainant would not forfeit her right to challenge the appointment."
Keywords:
cause of action; competition; condition; internal candidate; receivability of the complaint; vacancy notice;
Judgment 1553
81st Session, 1996
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 24
Extract:
UNESCO Staff Regulation 4.4 grants priority to serving staff for appointment to vacant posts. "Despite the unanimous recommendations by the senior personnel advisory boards and by the Appeals Board the Organization failed to give the complainant priority for vacant posts. It put the wrong question to its units and to its bureau of personnel. The right question was not whether there was a post that fitted her qualifications and experience but whether there was a post of which she was capable of fulfilling the duties competently. [...] No instructions went out that she should be given priority for any vacant posts. So the decision to terminate her services rested on a misinterpretation of Regulation 4.4 and so on a mistake of law. That decision must therefore be set aside".
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: UNESCO STAFF REGULATION 4.4
Keywords:
abolition of post; candidate; decision; internal candidate; interpretation; material damages; moral injury; organisation's duties; priority; qualifications; reassignment; reinstatement; staff regulations and rules; termination of employment; vacancy;
Judgment 1549
81st Session, 1996
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
"Although an organisation [may consider] late applicants, it must, whenever a competition is required or desired, announce a new deadline in the same way as it did the vacancy. It will then commit no breach of equality and the competition will be seen as fair."
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; competition; delay; due process; equal treatment; internal candidate; new time limit; organisation's duties; receivability of the complaint; selection procedure; time limit; vacancy; vacancy notice;
Consideration 6
Extract:
"An official of an international organisation who applies for a vacancy is entitled to have his application considered and assessed according to the set procedure once the organisation admits it under the terms of the vacancy notice. It may not deny that an applicant has a cause of action after it has appointed someone else, especially if the applicant is challenging the appointment on the grounds of breach of his rights in failure to apply the proper procedure".
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; case law; cause of action; competition; due process; internal candidate; organisation's duties; receivability of the complaint; staff regulations and rules; vacancy; vacancy notice;
Consideration 8
Extract:
"Whether [the complainant who is now retired] still has any interest in the quashing of someone else's appointment is moot; but he still has an interest in exposing a breach of due process which may warrant an award of damages: see Judgment 729 [...]."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 729
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; cause of action; claim moot; compensation; competition; due process; flaw; internal candidate; post; procedural flaw; receivability of the complaint; retirement;
Consideration 9
Extract:
"Any applicant [for employment], whatever his hopes of success, must be considered in good faith and in line with the basic rules of fair competition."
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; competition; due process; equal treatment; general principle; good faith; internal candidate; organisation's duties; vacancy;
Judgment 1497
80th Session, 1996
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"The defendant argues that since [the selected candidate] was an internal candidate it was right anyway to give her priority in the process of selection. The plea fails. As the Tribunal held, for example, in Judgment 519 [...], priority is not due to an internal applicant who does not have the minimum qualifications."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 519
Keywords:
appointment; case law; competition; condition; internal candidate; priority; qualifications;
Judgment 1390
78th Session, 1995
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
"Even supposing that the complainant applied only for transfer, the Tribunal's ruling in Judgment 1359 means - see under 5, 6 and 7 - that if an official applies for a transfer to a post to be filled by some other procedure he still has a legitimate interest, and any breach of that interest is liable to review and sanction."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1359
Keywords:
case law; cause of action; competition cancelled; internal candidate; judicial review; official; transfer;
Consideration 24
Extract:
"To what extent must an administration substantiate its decisions? The answer is that it depends on the sort of decision that is to be substantiated. In the present case a distinction must be drawn between the rejection of an external application, particularly where a competition has attracted many candidates, and the rejection of an application by a serving official. In the latter case the organisation has a duty to maintain the relations of trust it has with the staff member, and although it must remain free to choose how it will notify the reasons to him it must be wary of damaging his career prospects."
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; competition; competition cancelled; discretion; duty to substantiate decision; internal candidate; organisation's duties; purport; refusal; staff member's interest;
Consideration 27
Extract:
Article 15 of Annex 1 to the Eurocontrol Convention says that "the Agency shall be empowered to recruit personnel directly only if the contracting parties are unable to make qualified personnel available to it". The Tribunal holds that the provision "limits the organisation's freedom to recruit by giving priority to candidates prescribed by the contracting parties over 'outside' candidates, but it puts no restrictions on the organisation's freedom to assess the suitability of applicants, wherever they may come from, nor its right to give serving staff a reasonable opportunity of advancement provided that they are as well qualified as other candidates."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 15 OF ANNEX 1 TO THE EUROCONTROL CONVENTION
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; career; competition; competition cancelled; discretion; equal treatment; internal candidate; international instrument; interpretation; legitimate expectation; member state; official; priority; promotion; qualifications;
Judgment 1359
77th Session, 1994
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"The complainant qualified under the wording of the notice and was entitled as a eurocontrol official to have his application considered and assessed by a process that complied with the rules. [...] It was not, and the breach of his rightful interest affords grounds for this complaint."
Keywords:
candidate; cause of action; competition; internal candidate; procedural flaw; procedure before the tribunal; receivability of the complaint; staff member's interest; staff regulations and rules; vacancy notice;
Judgment 1323
76th Session, 1994
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 8-9
Extract:
The WHO appointed an external candidate to a position which the complainant had applied for. On the grounds of privilege the organization offered no evidence to the Board or the Tribunal of the external candidate's qualifications. "The Tribunal does not accept that the disclosure of a candidate's identity and qualifications may [...] inhibit the free expression of views by members of selection committees or prejudice the interests of other candidates. [...] The external candidate's qualifications were of essential importance to the Selection Committee in making its choice and to any appeal against the appointment made." No such documents may be withheld from the Tribunal.
Keywords:
candidate; confidential evidence; evidence; internal appeals body; internal candidate; open competition; selection board; submissions;
Consideration 10
Extract:
Vide Judgment 133.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 133
Keywords:
candidate; career; internal candidate; legitimate expectation; organisation's interest; post; priority; professional experience; satisfactory service; seniority; staff member's interest;
Judgment 1268
75th Session, 1993
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
Vide Judgments 107, consideration 1, and 1071, consideration 3.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 107, 1071
Keywords:
bias; candidate; case law; competition; equal treatment; internal candidate;
Judgment 1235
74th Session, 1993
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
The complainant took part in a competition as an internal candidate and his name was first on the short list drawn up by the Appointment and Promotion Committee. He is challenging the Director-General's decision to appoint an external candidate to the post he applied for. The decision rested on considerations of geographical distribution and UPU Staff Regulation 4.1. The Union pleads that when three posts as head of section fall vacant at the same time at least one successful candidate must be an outside one so as not to impede "the recruitment of fresh talent" that Regulation 4.3 requires. "But that is not at all what 4.3 says. equitable geographical distribution is a criterion that plainly is to apply only to recruitment, not to promotion, and there is no requirement in the Staff rRgulations or Rules that the Director-General recruit 'fresh talent' just because three posts as head of section have to be filled at the same time. The Director-General was obviously wrong in putting that construction on the rule."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: UPU STAFF REGULATION 4.3
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; competition; geographical distribution; internal candidate; interpretation; staff regulations and rules; written rule;
