Judgment No. 4518
Decision
1. The impugned decision dated 29 January 2020 is set aside to the extent stated in consideration 8 of this judgment.
2. ITU shall pay the complainant material damages equivalent to the salary and other benefits which he would have received had he been appointed to the subject post for a period of two years from 23 March 2019 to 22 March 2021 less any income he received from other employment during that same period.
3. ITU shall pay the complainant moral damages in the amount of 10,000 United States dollars.
4. ITU shall pay the complainant costs in the amount of 8,000 United States dollars.
5. All other claims are dismissed.
Summary
The complainant challenges his non-appointment to a fixed-term position and the non-renewal of his short-term contract, as well as the organisation’s refusal to conduct an investigation into the allegations of harassment made against him which, according to him, form the basis of the non-appointment and non-renewal decisions.
Judgment keywords
Keywords
complaint allowed; short-term; non-renewal of contract; harassment; selection procedure
Consideration 7
Extract:
It is recalled that according to the Tribunal’s case law, stated in consideration 2 of Judgment 4153, for example, the decision of an international organization to make an appointment is within the discretion of its executive head and that such a decision is subject to only limited review. However, such a decision may be set aside if it was taken without authority or in breach of a rule of form or of procedure, or if it was based on a mistake of law or fact, or if some material fact was overlooked, or if there was an abuse of authority, or if a clearly wrong conclusion was drawn from the evidence. Anyone who applies for a post to be filled by some process of selection is entitled to have her or his application considered in good faith and in keeping with the basic rules of fair and open competition. That is a right that every applicant must enjoy, whatever her or his hopes of success may be.
Reference(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 4153
Keywords
selection procedure
Consideration 10
Extract:
Whilst in the circumstances of this case it would be impracticable to order the complainant’s reinstatement, ITU will be ordered to compensate him because he was denied the opportunity to be appointed to the advertised post on a two-year contract in circumstances where he was the only candidate whom the Director of TSB and the Chief of Department had […] recommended to fill the post after the selection procedure. But for the unsubstantiated allegations, it is very difficult to avoid the conclusion that he would have been appointed.
Keywords
reinstatement; harassment; loss of opportunity; investigation
| 
