Judgment No. 1235
Decision
1. THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL'S DECISION OF 28 NOVEMBER 1991 IS QUASHED.
2. THE UNIVERSAL POSTAL UNION SHALL PAY THE COMPLAINANT 25,000 SWISS FRANCS IN MORAL DAMAGES.
3. IT SHALL PAY HIM 10,000 SWISS FRANCS IN COSTS.
Consideration 3
Extract:
"Although the Director-General is not of course bound to appoint the candidate the Committee puts first and has discretion in making the choice, the reasons for his decision must be stated so that the Tribunal may properly exercise its power of review."
Keywords
duty to substantiate decision; organisation's duties; promotion board; appointment; competition; candidate; judicial review; discretion; limits; purpose
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
written rule; staff regulations and rules; interpretation; appointment; competition; candidate; internal candidate; geographical distribution
| 
