Judgment No. 4407
The complaint is dismissed.
The complainant challenges the decision not to award her moral damages higher than 20,000 Swiss francs for the moral injury she alleges to have suffered as a result of the personal prejudice and bias she endured during her probation.
moral injury; probationary period; bias; complaint dismissed
The Tribunal finds that the Director-General did not err insofar as he accepted, in the impugned decision, the GBA’s conclusion that it did not find evidence that the decision to close the complainant’s End-Year PMDS with “no rating” and to extend her probationary period was tainted with bias or prejudice. In accordance with its case law, “the Tribunal shall not reweigh the evidence but shall limit itself to evaluating the lawfulness of the [...] findings and conclusions on the evidence” (see, for example, Judgment 4347, consideration 27, and the case law cited therein). The Tribunal finds that the GBA’s report in the present case is a balanced and thoughtful analysis of the issues raised in the internal appeal and, on its analysis, the conclusions and recommendations of the GBA were justified and rational. It is a report of a character which engages the principle discussed by the Tribunal in Judgment 3608, consideration 7, that the report warrants “considerable deference” (see also, for example, Judgments 3400, consideration 6, and 2295, consideration 10).
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 2295, 3400, 3608, 4347
report of the internal appeals body
The situations [the complainant] describes in her submissions to the Tribunal show clear issues of mismanagement but do not support a finding of personal prejudice and/or bias against her specifically.
With regard to [the complainant's] argument of a breach of confidentiality, the Tribunal finds that the privileged and confidential sharing of the GBA report within the Office of the Legal Counsel, Director-General’s Office, in order to provide advice and assistance to the Director-General, was lawful.