Home

The interviews took place between 3 and 15 December 2010 before a three-member expert panel. 12. Two of the three expert panel members who interviewed the Applicant had received relevant interview training: one in 2004 and the other as part of an expert panel training in March 2009. (...) Training requirements for expert panel members 30. There is no requirement in any of the regulations, rules or policies of the Organization for all expert panel members to undergo training in competency-based interviewing. 31. (...) The definition of assessment and expert panel are set out above in paras. 22 and 23. 32.

It is trite law that it is not for a party to decide who an expert is, but for the Tribunal. Consideration 6. (...) The expert report fails to offer more than a chronological account of the implementation of the policy. (...) Voigt that confer upon him the status of “expert”. Neither does his “expert report” contain a sworn affidavit that its contents are true and accurate, nor any statement that he fully understands and complies with his duty to the court. 11.

She has come across situations where an Expert Panel does not interview all eligible candidates or where mistakes are made by Expert Panels in considering candidates. (...) o. An expert panel may be generic or targeted to find candidates in a specific mission. (...) An Expert Panel must consider all candidates. 28.

The parties may call witnesses and experts to testify. The opposing party may cross-examine witnesses and experts. The Dispute Tribunal may examine witnesses and experts called by either party and may call any other witnesses or experts it deems necessary. (...) Landgraf be permitted to effectively challenge the expert evidence given on behalf of the Secretary-General by presenting expert evidence of her own.8 31.

Charles and 34 other candidates successfully completed the test and were invited for interview by a three-member expert panel in December 2010. The expert panel recommended 23 candidates for placement on the roster, which recommendation was endorsed by the Field Central Review Body on 2 February 2011. (...) In the instant case, two of the three expert panel members had received relevant interview training prior to the interviews. 9. (...) Charles’ other allegations in respect of the expert panel, holding that the selection process had been properly conducted in accordance with ST/AI/2010/3.

In his response to this request, the Secretary-General stated in his Note (A/62/748) of 14 March 2008: With the exception of experts on mission holding consultant contracts, the Secretariat is not aware of any established or specified recourse mechanism or procedure applicable to experts on mission. (...) “Experts on mission” remain accountable to the Organization for the proper discharge of their functions. (...) ST/SGB/2002/9 (Regulations Governing the Status, Basic Rights and Duties of Officials other than Secretariat Officials, and Experts on Mission) indeed sets out the basic rights and duties of “experts on mission” but does not go so far as to define them.

Whilst it was planned at previous promotion sessions to give special attention to candidates performing in expert posts, this did not happen in his case as he was disadvantaged by his expert status. (...) Contrary to the Applicant’s assertion, former experts were not disadvantaged by the methodology. Experts in UNHCR have the same rotation possibilities as other staff members.

The parties may call witnesses and experts to testify. The opposing party may cross-examine witnesses and experts. The Dispute Tribunal may examine witnesses and experts called by either party and may call other witnesses or experts it deems necessary. (...) The Dispute Tribunal shall decide whether the personal appearance of a witness or expert is required at oral proceedings and determine the appropriate means for satisfying the requirement for personal appearance.

The APPB was silent on how his period of service on an expert post for 12 years was taken into consideration. Moreover, the promotions methodology was discriminatory towards staff occupying expert posts and systematically disadvantaged them; c. (...) Furthermore, the Tribunal, in its Judgment Mebtouche UNDT/2009/039, had found that only persons currently assigned to expert posts should be considered as such. The Applicant, however, was not assigned to an expert post at the time of the 2009 promotions session; b.

Milka were subject-matter experts; Case No. UNDT/GVA/2015/139 Judgment No. (...) In Tiwathia UNDT/2015/021 the Tribunal “deemed that an expert sitting in a panel set up to recruit the senior head of a medical unit, did not necessarily need to be a doctor; an expert on management could be considered as a subject matter expert for this post, as it required managerial skills”. (...) The Respondent noted that the subject matter experts in the panel were Ms. Ho and Ms. Milka.