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

Selection procedure (660,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Selection procedure
Total judgments found: 86

< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 | next >



  • Judgment 3188


    114th Session, 2013
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decisions not to update her job description, not to select her for a G-6 position and her alleged subsequent demotion.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; downgrading; selection procedure; transfer;



  • Judgment 3186


    114th Session, 2013
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to select her to several positions for which she had applied.

    Judgment keywords

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3185, 3187

    Keywords:

    appointment; competition; complaint dismissed; selection procedure; status of complainant;



  • Judgment 3182


    114th Session, 2013
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant successfully challenges the decision not to appoint her to a position for which she applied, although she ranked first in the technical evaluation.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    appointment; complaint allowed; flaw; mistaken conclusion; recommendation; selection procedure;



  • Judgment 3177


    114th Session, 2013
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to refuse to promote him to grade P-5.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; decision quashed; selection procedure;



  • Judgment 3176


    114th Session, 2013
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant successfully challenges the appointment by direct selection of a staff member.

    Judgment keywords

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3175

    Keywords:

    appointment; complaint allowed; selection procedure;



  • Judgment 3157


    114th Session, 2013
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant successfully challenges the lawfulness of the selection process for a post for which he had unsuccessfully applied.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; decision quashed; selection procedure;



  • Judgment 3136


    113th Session, 2012
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    cause of action; complaint dismissed; selection procedure;



  • Judgment 3130


    113th Session, 2012
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    appointment; complaint allowed; decision quashed; selection procedure;



  • Judgment 3129


    113th Session, 2012
    United Nations Industrial Development Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; decision quashed; loss of opportunity; selection procedure;



  • Judgment 3110


    113th Session, 2012
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    [A]s pointed out in Judgment 3032 in relation to the same provisions on which the complainant relies, “when an international organisation wants to fill a post by competition, it must comply with the material rules and the general precepts of the case law”.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3032

    Keywords:

    appointment; competition; organisation's duties; selection procedure;



  • Judgment 3103


    112th Session, 2012
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; selection procedure;



  • Judgment 3101


    112th Session, 2012
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; decision quashed; selection procedure;



  • Judgment 3087


    112th Session, 2012
    Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; extension of contract; fixed-term; selection procedure;



  • Judgment 3077


    112th Session, 2012
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    competition; complaint dismissed; discretion; selection procedure;

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    The complainant takes the Board to task for having violated the adversarial principle by not giving him access to the competition file, or by not even being prepared to discuss whether the file was so confidential that all or part of it had to be kept secret.
    The Board’s procedure is governed by Annex IV to the Staff Regulations, paragraph 20 of which provides that “[a]ll proceedings of the Board are confidential” and that “[a]ny breach of confidentiality shall be considered serious misconduct”. In [...] Judgment 3032 the Tribunal held that the Board’s in camera consultation of a competition file did not constitute a procedural flaw warranting the quashing of the impugned decision. A candidate in a competition is not in fact entitled to consult the records of the Selection Board’s deliberations or to know the identity of the other candidates who have been eliminated (see Judgments 556, under 4(b), and 2142, under 16 and 17). In the instant case it is necessary to abide by this rule of confidentiality, the purpose of which is to protect both the general interest, thereby ensuring the Organization’s proper functioning, and the candidates’ privacy. The complainant, who was able to obtain all the relevant information from the responsible chief and to express his opinion thereon, also had an opportunity to comment as he wished on the ILO’s substantive arguments during the internal appeal procedure.
    It follows that this plea must [...] be dismissed.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 556, 2142, 3032

    Keywords:

    disclosure of evidence; selection board; selection procedure;



  • Judgment 3073


    112th Session, 2012
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    competition; complaint allowed; decision quashed; selection procedure;



  • Judgment 3052


    112th Session, 2012
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint dismissed; composition; selection board; selection procedure;



  • Judgment 3032


    111th Session, 2011
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 11

    Extract:

    "According to the Tribunal's case law, as reflected, inter alia, in Judgments 556, under 4(b), and 2142 under 16 and 17, a candidate is not entitled to consult any record there may be of a discussion by the selection board or to know the identity of all the candidates who were eliminated."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 556, 2142

    Keywords:

    candidate; communication to third party; competition; disclosure of evidence; right; selection board; selection procedure;

    Considerations 17- 18

    Extract:

    The complainants take the defendant to task for having unlawfully doubled the number of posts to be filled. According to them, any ex post facto change in the legal framework for the competition established by the vacancy notice breaches the principle of transparency of administrative procedures. [...]
    According to the Tribunal's case law, when a vacancy is to be filled, staff members must be given sufficient information to enable them to exercise their rights without facing any unnecessary hindrance. A competition aimed at filling a vacant post must be held under satisfactory conditions of objectivity and transparency, which guarantee that the candidates will receive equal treatment (see, for example, Judgment 2210, under 5, and the case law cited therein).
    In this case, the question is whether the failure to state explicitly in the vacancy notice that there were two senior translator/reviser posts to be filled might have dissuaded some people from submitting applications or prevented the competition from being conducted under satisfactory conditions of objectivity and transparency which guaranteed that the candidates received equal treatment.
    The Tribunal, like the defendant, considers that, given that the qualifications and experience required were exactly the same for the two posts, it cannot reasonably be argued that some people would have applied if they had known that there were two posts instead of just one to be filled. Furthermore, the complainants, who entered the competition anyway, were not adversely affected by that circumstance.
    It follows that, since the error committed in the vacancy notice did not taint the competition with any procedural flaw, the plea must be rejected.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2210

    Keywords:

    appointment; candidate; competition; duty to inform; equal treatment; formal requirements; official; organisation's duties; procedure before the tribunal; right of appeal; safeguard; selection procedure; vacancy;



  • Judgment 2762


    105th Session, 2008
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 26-27

    Extract:

    The complainant challenges the EPO's decision to recruit the spouse of the former President of the Office. "The Organisation is correct in stating that the Service Regulations do not preclude the recruitment of the spouses of staff members. Nor does there appear to be any regulatory bar to the recruitment of the spouses, friends, or close associates of the highest ranking officials in the Organisation. Whether this type of recruitment ought to be permitted is not for the Tribunal to decide but is a question of policy for each organisation to answer.
    However, where an organisation permits such recruitment, then it is imperative that special procedures be put in place to ensure the integrity and transparency of the selection process. Where such procedures have not been put in place, the presumptions of regularity and bona fides will not apply. In the absence of the operation of these presumptions, it will take very little to establish improper motive or bad faith."

    Keywords:

    appointment; competence of tribunal; competition; executive head; family relationship; good faith; motivation; presumption; procedure before the tribunal; selection procedure;



  • Judgment 2393


    98th Session, 2005
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    The general principles also allow that a mistake as to a candidate’s qualifications or experience may constitute a mistake of fact or result in some material fact being overlooked. It is this consideration that is invoked by the complainant’s contentions that he had greater experience and skills than the successful candidate, and that the interview panel and the FAO were mistaken as to his management skills. However, and as held in Judgment 1827, the selection of candidates necessarily “requires a high degree of judgment” with which the Tribunal will interfere only if a serious defect is demonstrated. And as was also held in that judgment, a defect of that kind is not established merely by asserting that one is better qualified than the selected candidate.

    Keywords:

    appointment; competition; discretion; judicial review; mistake of fact; mistake of law; selection procedure;



  • Judgment 1646


    83rd Session, 1997
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 6 and 10

    Extract:

    "When an organisation chooses to hold a competition it must abide by its written rules and by the general principles set forth in the case law, particularly insofar as they govern the formal side of the process. [...] As the Appeal Board gathered from the personal records of the candidates on the preselection panel's list, [the successful candidate] had neither the university degree nor the experience that the notice required."

    Keywords:

    applicable law; appointment; candidate; case law; competition; criteria; degree; due process; international civil service principles; organisation's duties; patere legem; procedure before the tribunal; professional experience; selection procedure; staff regulations and rules; vacancy notice;

< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 | next >


 
Last updated: 14.10.2021 ^ top