Competition (294, 295, 296, 297, 298, 299, 300, 301, 302, 303, 304,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Competition
Total judgments found: 163
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 | next >
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 2072
91st Session, 2001
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
The complainant benefited from a voluntary separation programme that the organization had had to implement because of financial difficulties. He is challenging the refusal to consider his request for re-employment. "The organization cannot be taken to task for not considering him for [vacant] posts for which he had not applied, or for not offering him another [post] while it was still in financial straits."
Keywords:
agreed termination; budgetary reasons; competition; failure to answer claim; participation; post; refusal; reinstatement; request by a party; separation from service; vacancy; vacancy notice;
Judgment 2060
91st Session, 2001
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7(a)
Extract:
"The complainant alleges that the decision not to shortlist him was not adequately explained. But the plea cannot succeed. Precedent has it that when an organisation informs candidates that they have been unsuccessful, it must take care not to harm their prospects. Moreover, in announcing the results of a competition and, more generally when the administration has to choose between several candidates, as here, the reasons for the choice need not be given at the same time as the decision. It is enough for the reasons to be given in some later procedure (see Judgments 1990 and 2035 and the others cited therein)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1990, 2035
Keywords:
candidate; case law; competition; decision; duty to substantiate decision; grounds; organisation's duties; refusal; respect for dignity;
Consideration 4
Extract:
"Candidates who apply for a post to be filled by competition, whatever their hopes of success may be, are entitled to have their applications considered in good faith and in keeping with the basic rules of fair competition. An organisation must be careful to abide by the rules on selection and when the process proves flawed, the Tribunal will quash any resulting appointment, albeit on the understanding that the organisation must 'shield' the successful candidate from any injury (see for example Judgments 1990 and 2020 and the others cited therein)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1990, 2020
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; case law; competition; competition cancelled; condition; due process; equal treatment; general principle; good faith; injury; international civil service principles; post; qualifications;
Judgment 2054
91st Session, 2001
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
"The Tribunal is unable to agree with the complainant that as a disabled former staff member he is entitled to a right to reassignment. There is no basis in the Staff Regulations for conferring on him a preferential status. As with any job applicant, he has to follow the procedures and apply for any desired vacant post. To rule otherwise would, in effect, introduce an amendment to the applicable rules to unduly favour disabled former staff members. As the Tribunal has held in Judgment 637 [...] the staff (much less former employees) 'may not demand amendment of the rules governing their employment'."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 637
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; candidate; competition; handicapped person; priority; reassignment; right; separation from service; staff regulations and rules; vacancy;
Judgment 2051
91st Session, 2001
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
The complainant had applied for another post within the organization. While he was on leave in order to prepare his daughter's wedding, he was invited by telephone to attend an interview within two days. The complainant having stated he would not be able to attend the interview in that timeframe, his name was deleted from the list of candidates taken into consideration by the Selection Committee. "The failure to give reasonable notice to the complainant to attend an interview by refusing to take into account the family circumstances of the complainant at the time, followed by the elimination of the complainant from consideration when he could not attend, constitutes [a] flaw in the procedure adopted by the administration in respect of the selection for this post."
Keywords:
candidate; competition; due process; flaw; notice; post; refusal; selection board;
Judgment 2040
90th Session, 2001
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"As the Tribunal has held in many judgments, a decision by an international organisation to make an appointment is a discretionary one and as such is subject to only limited review. It may be quashed only if it was taken without authority, or in breach of a rule of form or of procedure, or if it rested on an error of fact or of law, or if some essential fact was overlooked, or if there was abuse of authority, or if clearly mistaken conclusions were drawn from the evidence. Moreover, the Tribunal will exercise its power of review with special caution in such cases and will not replace the organisation's assessment of the candidates with its own (see Judgment 1497 [...])."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1497
Keywords:
abuse of power; appointment; candidate; competition; decision; decision-maker; discretion; disregard of essential fact; flaw; formal flaw; judicial review; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; misuse of authority; procedural flaw;
Judgment 2004
90th Session, 2001
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 14
Extract:
Out of six candidates, only the complainant was interviewed by video conference. "While the Tribunal is not to be understood as saying that a video conference is not a perfectly acceptable method of conducting interviews, care must always be taken to ensure that no candidate is given a potentially unfair advantage by that process. Flying one person across the ocean to be interviewed while leaving a competitor from the same area at home is open to the interpretation of unequal treatment."
Keywords:
bias; competition; discretion; equal treatment; flaw; limits; procedural flaw; remand;
Consideration 20
Extract:
"The Tribunal wishes to emphasise that there is nothing wrong in having a policy aimed at gender parity. For too long women have been subjected to discrimination in appointments to senior posts which can be proved by statistics. But this policy cannot be achieved by setting quotas and by reverse discrimination, in other words, by the appointment for particular posts of women who are less qualified than men. This is contrary to [Staff] Regulation 4.3 which provides that selection shall be without regard to race, creed or sex'. The policy can be achieved by different means [...] but the bottom line must always be that the person best qualified should be appointed."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: WHO STAFF REGULATION 4.3
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; competition; equal treatment; priority; qualifications; remand; right; sex discrimination;
Judgment 1990
89th Session, 2000
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"The basic rules to be respected [in a competition] include the right of all applicants to equal treatment. The organisation may make no distinction between candidates on the basis of criteria - language, for example - which are not referred to in the entry requirements (see Judgment 1158, [...] under 4 et seq)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1158
Keywords:
candidate; competition; criteria; due process; equal treatment; knowledge of languages; qualifications;
Consideration 7
Extract:
"In the competition, the English-speaking and French-speaking candidates were not in the same situation, so criteria were needed that took account of the differences. The matter becomes more complex if account is taken of candidates whose mother tongue is neither English nor French. [...] Since one of the requirements of the competition - and the post in question - was a good knowledge of the two main working languages, it was not unfair to provide for tests in one language only and apply an adequate correction factor to all candidates who were non-English-speaking. Such a solution redresses the balance and goes some way to ensuring equality between the candidates. Provided that it really is adequate, a correction factor does not impair the right to equal treatment."
Keywords:
candidate; compensatory measure; competition; criteria; difference; equal treatment; knowledge of languages; qualifications; safeguard;
Judgment 1982
89th Session, 2000
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5(A)
Extract:
"Precedent has it that, in the interests of the organisation, a chief executive may interrupt a competition, even in order to change the requirements of the post (see Judgment 1771, [...] under 4(e), and the judgments cited therein). He may even decide not to proceed to any appointment or promotion if he concludes that none of the candidates meets the specified requirements (see Judgment 1771, under4(c))."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1771
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; case law; competition; competition cancelled; discontinuance; organisation's interest;
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 1871
87th Session, 1999
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 9-10
Extract:
"The Tribunal observes that the Director-General gave paramount importance to the principle of geographic distribution, which resulted in him selecting the applicant who was second in the list recommended by the Selection Committee because that applicant was a national of an 'under-represented' country, while the complainant, who was in first place, was a national of an 'equitably represented' country. Analysis of the [Constitution, General Rules and Manual of the organization as well as] the facts of the case show that the Director-General was mistaken in his interpretation of these provisions. The Constitution [...] clearly states that the highest standards of efficiency and of technical competence' are of paramount importance in appointing staff. The Selection Committee is under the obligation to recommend for selection the candidate whose qualifications most closely meet the requirements of the post. Therefore the essential qualifications required are the priority criterion. Consideration of other criteria, including seniority of service and geographic distribution, which appear to be of a subsidiary nature, is only envisaged where several candidates are equally well qualified."
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; competition; criteria; geographical distribution; nationality; recommendation; selection board; seniority; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1845
87th Session, 1999
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
"Under Article II(6) of its Statute the Tribunal is open to a former staff member. However, Article II(5) restricts the competence of the Tribunal, ratione materiae, to complaints alleging the non-observance, in substance or in form, of the terms of appointment of a staff member or of the provisions of the applicable staff regulations. On expiry of the complainant's contract, he ceased to be a staff member. His complaint, concerning his non-selection [to the post of assistant to the head of administration] does not involve any allegation of the violation of any rights which he enjoyed under his contract or the Staff Regulations insofar as they continued to apply to him. The Tribunal therefore [cannot] entertain the complaint."
Reference(s)
ILOAT reference: ARTICLE II (5) OFTHE STATUTE;
ARTICLE II (6) OF THE STATUTE
Keywords:
candidate; competence of tribunal; competition; contract; enforcement; external candidate; iloat statute; locus standi; receivability of the complaint; separation from service; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1827
86th Session, 1999
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"The selection of candidates for promotion is necessarily based on merit and requires a high degree of judgment on the part of those involved in the selection process. Those who would have the Tribunal interfere must demonstrate a serious defect in it; it is not enough simply to assert that one is better qualified than the selected candidate."
Keywords:
burden of proof; candidate; competition; criteria; discretion; judicial review; limits; procedural flaw; promotion; qualifications; satisfactory service; selection board; work appraisal;
Judgment 1789
86th Session, 1999
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"[The Organisation] rejected [the complainant's application] on the grounds that he was overqualified [for the job put up for competition]. Such grounds are wrong in law. Yet they are the only ones on which the [organisation] rejected the complainant, purporting to act under R II 1.03 [of the Staff Regulations]. It thereby denied the complainant his right to apply and to have his application properly considered. There was breach of equal treatment."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE R II 1.03 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS
Keywords:
breach; candidate; competition; criteria; discretion; equal treatment; flaw; grounds; procedure before the tribunal; right; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1787
86th Session, 1999
International Organization for Migration
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 10-11
Extract:
"The qualifications expected may be just 'desirable', not requirements binding in law. But the appointing authority is not free on that account [...] to disregard the fact that some do qualify and to plump for the very one who does not, even one who in other respects has the right experience and skills. [...] Here the Organization picked someone wanting in listed qualifications which, though said to be only 'desirable', were in fact essential. It thereby fell short of the standards of objectiveness and openness that must govern appointment to a senior post in an international organisation. The process of selection cannot stand [...]" (See Judgment 1595, under 10.)
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1595
Keywords:
appointment; candidate; competition; competition cancelled; condition; criteria; discretion; flaw; post; post description; procedure before the tribunal; professional experience; qualifications; vacancy notice;
Consideration 4
Extract:
"Although the abolition of his post did demand of the Organization efforts to place him suitably and at the right grade elsewhere, he had no right to preference for any particular post, the less so since others were in the same plight. He may object to the Organization's failure to let him have the transfer he wanted, but such failure does not make it unlawful for the organization to have appointed another official to the post he had applied for, provided at least that that official was qualified."
Keywords:
abolition of post; appointment; competition; condition; equal treatment; grade; organisation's duties; post; priority; qualifications; reassignment; right;
Consideration 5
Extract:
"When a decision is adverse to a staff member the competent administrative authority does have to reveal the reasons for it. But when the result of a competition is announced and, more broadly, when a choice is made between candidates the reasons for the choice need not be notified at the same time as the decision."
Keywords:
candidate; competition; decision; discretion; duty to substantiate decision; grounds; procedure before the tribunal; time limit;
Judgment 1771
85th Session, 1998
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2(c)
Extract:
"The complainant applies for an expert enquiry to determine whether she is fit for the duties of the post. Firm precedent has it that an executive head must be allowed discretion to determine what services the Organisation needs and whether someone is able to provide them, and that the Tribunal may exercise only a limited power of review over decisions on such matters. To allow the complainant's application for expert inquiry would be to assume that the Tribunal might replace the Director General's assessment of her with its own and would be alien to the notion of limited review [...]."
Keywords:
case law; competition; discretion; executive head; expert inquiry; judicial review; qualifications; refusal;
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;
Consideration 15
Extract:
"UNIDO's professed policy of increasing the number of women staff at all levels required at least that, other things being equal, it should give preference to applications from women; indeed encouraging women to apply was consistent only with their right to such preference."
Keywords:
candidate; competition; priority; right; sex discrimination;
Judgment 1698
84th Session, 1998
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
The Tribunal notes "that a vacancy notice [...] is necessarily a document whose validity is limited in time by the closing date of the particular competition which it announces. [...] The requirements of any post may of course change over time."
Keywords:
competition; condition; limits; vacancy; vacancy notice;
Judgment 1689
84th Session, 1998
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"The Agency replies that [...] where candidates are found suitable and put on a par no explanation is called for, though 'a reasoned report would have made sense had the Board put the two candidates in order of preference'. The plea is unsound. It postulates that the complainant was unaffected by the finding that he was as fit for the post as the other candidate, and in any event overlooks the fact that the candidates are in competition. [...]. If two are ranked ex aequo each may have an interest in contending that the other should have been marked lower. [...]. In any event the final ranking [...] must be accounted for."
Keywords:
candidate; cause of action; competition; duty to substantiate decision; selection board;
Judgment 1659
83rd Session, 1997
European Free Trade Association
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
The complainants "plead breach of Regulation 12.2(b) which confers priority for re-employment on permanent employees whose posts had to be abolished. But since all the posts were abolished the Association had no choice in the matter and nothing to offer the redundant staff but the opportunity of applying for jobs in the new Secretariat."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: EFTA STAFF REGULATION 12.2(B)
Keywords:
abolition of post; competition; contract; exception; organisation's duties; permanent appointment; priority; reassignment; reorganisation; separation from service; staff regulations and rules; termination of employment;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 | next >
|
