Judgment No. 542
Decision
1. THE FAO SHALL PAY THE COMPLAINANT DAMAGES AMOUNTING TO 1,000 UNITED STATES DOLLARS.
2. HE IS AWARDED 1,000 DOLLARS TOWARDS COSTS.
3. HIS OTHER CLAIMS ARE DISMISSED.
Consideration 2
Extract:
"Someone who tries to conceal an awkward truth, even with skillful phrasing, may not defend the ruse by accusing the reader of an oversight. The Tribunal [...] holds that the complainant's attitude warranted the [organization's] imposing the penalty provided for in the letter of appointment" (withdrawal of the offer).
Keywords
misrepresentation; contract; offer withdrawn
Consideration 2
Extract:
"The Tribunal holds that it was not wrong to solicit such information [regarding legal convictions]. In technical assistance missions the FAO puts its own reputation at stake, and the mission the complainant was to carry out and the grade he was to hold made it quite reasonable for the organization to ascertain fully not only the applicant's professional competence but also his character."
Keywords
misrepresentation; fitness for international civil service
Consideration 3
Extract:
The penalty imposed was justified, but the complainant's appointment was terminated "without warning of the action that might be taken against him, although it [was] never said that the matter was urgent. The general principle of lawis that an administration may not impose a penalty on anyone before giving him an opportunity to comment on the charges against him".
Keywords
misrepresentation; general principle; right to reply; contract; offer withdrawn; flaw; procedural flaw
Consideration 4
Extract:
"If what [the complainant] is seeking is that the judgment should not be made public or at least should not mention his name, he fails under the rule that any judicial decision must be made public unless there is an express provision authorising secrecy on certain grounds. There is no such provision in the Statute of the Tribunal."
Keywords
publication of judgment
| 
