����AV

In line with the jurisprudence of the Organization, the role of the Tribunal was limited to reviewing whether the candidate received full and fair consideration, the procedures were followed, improper motives were absent and relevant materials had been considered. In this regard, UNAT has held that a candidate alleging a failure to observe his or her right to full and fair consideration for selection must prove through clear and convincing evidence that procedure was violated, the panel was biased, irrelevant material was considered or relevant material ignored. Contrary to the Applicant’s contention, there were no procedural irregularities in the selection exercise. Candidates who had applied to both job openings were informed that they were required to only participate in one written assessment. This was done in order to facilitate the recruitment process for which a combined one thousand nine hundred and thirty-five (1,935) applications were received. The Applicant’s claim of loss of career opportunity was without merit. She bore the burden of substantiating the pecuniary and/or non-pecuniary damages that she claimed to have suffered as a consequence of the contested decision. The Applicant did not provide any evidence to show that she suffered any loss of career opportunities as a result of the contested decision. Her contention was speculative at best.