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

Judgment No. 4724


1. The impugned decision dated 27 September 2016, as well as the complainant’s 2015 appraisal report, are set aside.
2. The EPO shall remove the appraisal report from the complainant’s personal file.
3. The EPO shall pay the complainant costs in the amount of 1,000 euros.
4. All other claims are dismissed.


The complainant challenges her appraisal report for 2015.

Judgment keywords


complaint allowed; performance report; rating

Consideration 2


It is convenient for the Tribunal to recall the following statement which it made in Judgment 4564, consideration 3, concerning the limited power of review that it exercises in the matter of staff appraisals:
“[A]ssessment of an employee’s merit during a specified period involves a value judgement; for this reason, the Tribunal must recognise the discretionary authority of the bodies responsible for conducting such an assessment. Of course, it must ascertain whether the ratings given to the employee have been determined in full conformity with the rules, but it cannot substitute its own opinion for the assessment made by these bodies of the qualities, performance and conduct of the person concerned. The Tribunal will therefore intervene only if the staff report was drawn up without authority or in breach of a rule of form or procedure, if it was based on an error of law or fact, if a material fact was overlooked, if a plainly wrong conclusion was drawn from the facts, or if there was abuse of authority.”
In Judgment 4637, having recalled that statement, the Tribunal observed, in consideration 13, that:
“Since the Tribunal’s power of review does not extend to determining as such whether appraisals are well founded, the fact that the Appraisals Committee’s power of review is itself confined to assessing whether an appraisal report is arbitrary or discriminatory does not affect the Tribunal’s power of review, which continues to be exercised on the same terms as previously.”


ILOAT Judgment(s): 4564, 4637


rating; discretion; role of the tribunal

Last updated: 12.10.2023 ^ top