Judgment No. 4683
Decision
The complaint is dismissed.
Summary
The complainant contests her non-selection to a post.
Judgment keywords
Keywords
selection procedure; complaint dismissed
Consideration 6
Extract:
As regards the complainant’s reliance on acquired rights, consistent case law has it that “a staff member has no entitlement or right to be selected for a contested post. The Director-General’s decision to order a new selection process for the subject post was entirely within her discretionary authority” (see Judgment 4100, consideration 5). The complainant, regardless of the roster’s validity, had no acquired right to be directly appointed.
Reference(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 4100
Keywords
acquired right; selection procedure
Consideration 12
Extract:
[T]he Tribunal’s case law states that the duty to state the reasons for the choice does not mean that they must be notified at the same time as the decision. These reasons may be disclosed at a later date, for example in the context of appeal proceedings (see Judgments 4467, consideration 7, and 2978, consideration 4).
Reference(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 2978, 4467
Keywords
selection procedure; motivation
Consideration 18
Extract:
It is worth noting that the Tribunal stated, in Judgment 1732, consideration 9, that: “[w]here there is a rational and legitimate explanation for a decision, [...] the Tribunal should not be overzealous to infer bad faith or improper motive simply because the individuals concerned do not enjoy good personal relations”.
Reference(s)
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 1732
Keywords
bias; conflict of interest
| 
