Judgment No. 1355
Decision
THE COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED.
Consideration 4
Extract:
"According to the case law - especially Judgment 1235 [...] - the Director-General is not bound by the appointment and Promotion Committee's recommendations and in particular need not appoint the candidate the Committee has put first. In the exercise of discretion, he must ensure that his choice is not tainted with any mistake of law or fact and, to allow the tribunal to exercise its power of review, he must state the reasons for his decision."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1235
Keywords
duty to substantiate decision; advisory body; case law; promotion board; appointment; competition; candidate; judicial review; discretion; executive head; limits; mistake of fact; advisory opinion
Consideration 9
Extract:
"Any promotion wholly or even mainly based on considerations of sex would unquestionably be unlawful."
Keywords
sex discrimination; promotion; candidate; judicial review; discretion; flaw
Consideration 9
Extract:
"Qualifications being comparable, it was lawful for the Union to apply the test of seniority" when picking a candidate for promotion.
Keywords
competence; promotion; seniority; candidate; judicial review; discretion; criteria
Consideration 10
Extract:
The Tribunal rejects his plea "that the Director-General erred in law by assuming that he was empowered to disregard the Appointment and Promotion Committee's 'decisions'. What the Committee does is advise, not decide, and the Director-General simply exercised his discretion in choosing between the candidates on its short-list. Although [...] he must exercise such discretion lawfully he is not bound by the Committee's ranking of candidates."
Keywords
decision; advisory body; promotion board; appointment; competition; candidate; discretion; executive head; advisory opinion; condition
Consideration 8
Extract:
"There is no rule or principle of law that requires the Director-General to state in so many words just why he has turned someone down for promotion or appointment. What matters is that, if the official asks, the reasons must be revealed. Otherwise the Tribunal may not exercise its power of review and determine whether the reasons are lawful and the decision sound."
Keywords
decision; duty to substantiate decision; grounds; general principle; organisation's duties; written rule; no provision; promotion; appointment; candidate; post; judicial review; refusal; request by a party; subsidiary; official
| 
