UNDT/2012/065

UNDT/2012/065, Farr

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

Language of examination: Pursuant to section 5.6 of ST/AI/2010/7, candidates may choose to take the oral examination in either English or French.Alternative compensation: Given that the placement of the Applicant on the roster of successful candidates does not guarantee that she will be selected for a position, and thus does not carry appointment or promotion, the Tribunal is not required to set an amount of compensation that the Respondent may elect to pay as an alternative to the specific performance ordered.Compensation and evidence of injury: While the Applicant seeks compensation for the injury suffered as a result of the contested decision, she does not provide any details as to the type of damage suffered, be it material or moral, nor does she provide any evidence of such damage. In accordance with the Appeals Tribunal’s jurisprudence in Hastings 2011-UNAT-109 and Yapa 2011-UNAT-168, the Tribunal can only reject the Applicant’s request for compensation.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant, a general service staff, contests the decision not to place her on the roster of candidates successful in the competitive examination for recruitment to the Professional category of staff members from other categories. She claims that the examination process was flawed because she was denied the right to take the oral examination in French, as provided for in section 5.6 of ST/AI/2010/7, and because of the circumstances in which such right was denied. The Tribunal finds that the Applicant accepted under duress that the board of examiners conduct the oral examination in English and concludes accordingly that the contested decision must be regarded as unlawful. The Tribunal further finds that had the Applicant taken the oral examination in accordance with established procedures, she had serious chances of being placed on the roster. Accordingly, the Tribunal orders that the Applicant be placed on the roster of successful candidates.

Legal Principle(s)

N/A

Outcome

Judgment entered for Applicant in full or in part

OAJ prepared this case law summary for informational purposes only. It is no official record and should not be relied upon as an authoritative interpretation of the Tribunals' rulings. For the authoritative texts, please refer to the judgment or order rendered by the respective Tribunal. The Tribunals are the only bodies competent to interpret their respective judgments, as provided under Article 12(3) of the UNDT Statute and Article 11(3) of the UNAT Statute. Any inaccuracies in the publication are the sole responsibility of OAJ, which should be contacted directly for any correction requests. To provide comments, don't hesitate to get in touch with OAJ at oaj@un.org.

The judgment summaries were generally prepared in English. They were translated into French and are being reviewed for accuracy of the translation.

Full judgment

Applicants/Appellants

Farr

Entity

UNOV

Case Number(s)

UNDT/GVA/2011/84

Tribunal

UNDT

Registry

Geneva