ÍæÅ¼½ã½ã

UNDT/2016/070

UNDT/2016/070, Krioutchkov

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The Tribunal found, on receivability, that this amounts to an appealable administrative decision, insofar as it had direct effects on the Applicant’s rights, and on the merits, that filling a vacancy by laterally transferring a staff member holding the same grade and within the department of the vacant post, without undergoing a full-fledged selection procedure under the staff selection system, does not per se violate the applicable legal framework. Direct legal effects: A decision to fill a given vacancy through a lateral movement has direct legal effects on the rights of potential candidates for the vacancy. First, it renders ineligible any potential candidate who is not within the same department/office and/or is not at the same level; second, it excludes the application of the set of rules that govern competitive recruitment procedures. Lateral transfer under sec. 2.5 of ST/AI/2010/3: Sec. 2.5 of ST/AI/2010/3, and for that matter, sec. 2.2 of ST/AI/2000/1 regarding the more specific scenario of language Professional staff in their first five years of service, explicitly provide for the possibility of transferring staff within their departments or offices to job openings at the same level without following the procedures laid down in the staff selection system. These provisions do not contradict art. 101.3 of the UN Charter or staff regulation 4.2, nor General Assembly resolutions requesting the Secretary-General to publish vacancies.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contests the decision not to evaluate/select him for a position of P-3 Russian Translator with UNOG; the vacancy in question was in fact filled by lateral transfer instead of through a competitive selection process.

Legal Principle(s)

N/A

Outcome
Dismissed on merits

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.