UNDT/2019/185

UNDT/2019/185, Krioutchkov

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The Organization cannot be held responsible for incorrect information entered by the Applicant that resulted in his screening out of the recruitment process. The lawfulness of the screening out of the Applicant’s candidature does not hinge on whether the Administration knew or could/should have known that the Applicant’s degree was of a higher level than the one indicated in his PHP. The issue of whether the Applicant’s candidature was pre-screened by a Human Resources Officer is irrelevant in determining whether his candidature received full and fair consideration. Hence, implicitly considering that the outcome of the pre-screening exercise was exclusively relevant to assess the lawfulness of the contested administrative decision. Finally, the Applicant’s claim concerning the loss of concrete chances for career development due to limited or no mobility within the UN translators’ professional group is not relevant for the adjudication of the present case, where the Applicant challenges, and is entitled only to challenge, a specific administrative decision and not a general administrative practice. Although in the abstract this could be relevant for the examination of damages, it is not relevant in the present case in view of the finding that the contested administrative decision was lawful.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant contested his non-consideration and eventual non-selection for the position of Russian Reviser/Self-Revising Translator (P-4) at the United Nations Office at Vienna (UNOV).

Legal Principle(s)

Sec. 7.1 of ST/AI/2010/3 provides that job applicants will be pre-screened on the basis of the information provided in their job application to determine whether they meet the minimum requirements of the job opening and sec. 5.1, which specifies that applications cannot be amended following their submission.

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.

Applicants/Appellants
Krioutchkov
Entity
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry
Date of Judgement
Duty Judge
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type