he International Monetary
Fund by Mr. Michel DAoust, a staff member of the Fund.
2. Applicant challenges elements of the process by which the Fund filled the vacancy for
Deputy Division Chief of the Recruitment and Staffing Division (RSD) of the Human
Resources Department (HRD),
1
for which Applicant was an unsuccessful candidate.
Mr. DAoust contends that the selection process was affected by procedural deficiencies that
contravened Fund rules and substantially affected its outcome. In particular, Applicant maintains
that the three candidates who were shortlisted for the position (including the individual
ultimately selected for appointment) did not meet its qualifications as set out in the Vacancy
Announcement and Job Standard, and that, accordingly, their applications should have been
rejected at the screening stage. In Applicants view, this error was repeated by the Selection
Panel, the Head of the hiring Department, and the Review Committee. In addition, Applicant
maintains that in filling the vacancy, the Fund improperly took account of the diversity profiles
of candidates, which, he alleges, resulted in impermissible discrimination against him on the
basis of his gender, race, nationality and age. Accordingly, Applicant contends that the initial
shortlisting of three candidates and the ultimate selection and appointment of the Deputy
Division Chief were arbitrary, capricious and discriminatory and therefore represented an abuse
of the Funds discretion. Applicant additionally contends that he has suffered damage to his
professional reputation and health as a result of the allegedly improper selection procedure, as
well as retaliation for pursuing his complaint. Finally, Applicant challenges aspects of the review
of his Grievance by the Funds Grievance Committee.

1
The Tribunals Revised Decision on the protection privacy and method of publication (June 8, 2006), para. 3,
provides in part: The departments and divisions of the Fund shall be referred to by numerals unless specification is
desirable for the comprehensibility of the Judgment or Order. In the instant case, identification of the department
and division is necessary to the consideration of the issues of the case. See Mr. R, Applicant v. International
Monetary Fund, Respondent, IMFAT Judgment No. 2002-1 (March 5, 2002), note. 1.
Pursuant to Rule XXII, para. 2 of the Tribunals Rules of Procedure, the Fund has requested that in order to protect
their privacy of the shortlisted candidates for the vacancy their names not be published by the Tribunal. Applicant
has responded that he does not object to this request. Paragraph 2 of the Tribunals Revised Decision on the
protection of privacy and method of publication provides: The name of any other individual involved shall not
appear where the Fund has so requested pursuant to Rule XXII, para. 2, and where good cause has been shown for
protecting the privacy of an individual, or where the Tribunal decides that a reference to a named person would be
inappropriate. In accordance with its usual practice, the Tribunal will not name persons other than the Applicant in
this case.

- 2 -

3. Respondent, for its part, maintains that it did not abuse its discretion in filling the
vacancy for the RSD Deputy Division Chief position, and that the overall selection process, as
well as its stages, were procedurally sound. Respondent maintains that all candidates
qualifications were properly assessed at each stage of the process, and that it was within the
discretion of the Selection Panel to determine the significance and weight to be accorded the
various critical competencies referred to in the Vacancy Announcement and to assess the
candidates qualifications in their light. Respondent denies that considerations of diversity
played a role in the process of filling the vacancy of RSD Deputy Division Chief, a process that
it maintains was designed to minimize the possibility of bias and favoritism. Respondent
furthermore denies that HRD failed to address Applicants complaint in good faith or that he was
subjected to retaliation for the making of that complaint. Respondent additionally maintains that
Applicants challenge to elements of the Grievance Committee proceedings is not properly
before the Tribunal.
The Procedure
4. On December 19, 2005, Mr. DAoust filed an Application with the Administrative
Tribunal. Pursuant to Rule VII, para. 6 of the Tribunals Rules of Procedure, the Registrar
advised Applicant that the Application did not fulfill the requirements of paras. 3 and 5 of that
Rule. Accordingly, Applicant was given fifteen days in which to correct the deficiencies. The
Application, having been brought into compliance within the indicated period, is considered filed
on the original date.
2


2
Rule VII provides in pertinent part:

Applications

...


3. The Applicant shall include as attachments all documents cited in the
application in an original or in an unaltered copy and in a complete text
unless part of it is obviously irrelevant. If a document is not in English, the
Applicant shall attach a certified English translation. The Applicant shall
also attach a copy of any report and recommendation of the Grievance
Committee in the matter.



5. An application shall include evidence that the Applicant has satisfied the
requirements of Article V, and that the application is being submitted to the
Tribunal within the time prescribed by Article VI, of the Statute.

6. If the application does not fulfill the requirements established in
Paragraphs 1 through 5 above, the Registrar shall advise the Applicant of
the deficiencies and give him a reasonable period of time in which to make
the appropriate corrections or additions. If this is done within the period
indicated, the application shall be considered filed on the original date. ...


- 3 -

5. The Application was transmitted to Respondent on December 22, 2005. On
January 9, 2006, pursuant to Rule IV, para. (f),
3
the Registrar circulated within the Fund a notice
summarizing the issues raised in the Application. Respondent filed its Answer to Mr. DAousts
Application on February 3, 2006. On March 2, 2006, Applicant submitted his Reply. The Funds
Rejoinder was filed on April 5, 2006.
Request for production of documents
6. Pursuant to Rule VII, para 2(h)
4
and Rule XVII
5
of the Tribunals Rules of Procedure, in
his Application, Mr. DAoust made the following requests for production of documents:

3
Rule IV, para. (f) provides:
Under the authority of the President, the Registrar of the Tribunal shall:

(f) upon the transmittal of an application to the Fund, unless the President
decides otherwise, circulate within the Fund a notice summarizing the
issues raised in the application, without disclosing the name of the
Applicant, in order to inform the Fund community of proceedings pending
before the Tribunal;
4
Rule VII, para. 2(h) provides:

An application instituting proceedings shall be submitted to the
Tribunal through the Registrar. Each application shall contain:

.


(h) any request for production of documents as provided by Article X
of the Statute and Rule XVII below.

5

Rule XVII provides:
Production of Documents

1. The Applicant, pursuant to Rule VII, Paragraph 2(h), may request the
Tribunal to order the production of documents or other evidence which he
has requested and to which he has been denied access by the Fund. The
request shall contain a statement of the Applicants reasons supporting
production accompanied by any documentation that bears upon the request.
The Fund shall be given an opportunity to present its views on the matter to
the Tribunal, pursuant to Rule VIII, Paragraph 5.

2. The Tribunal may reject the request if it finds that the documents or other
evidence requested are irrelevant to the issues of the case, or that
compliance with the request would be unduly burdensome or would
infringe on the privacy of individuals. For purposes of deciding on the
request, the Tribunal may examine in camera the documents requested.

3. The Tribunal may, subject to Article X, Section 1 of the Statute, order the
production of documents or other evidence in the possession of the Fund,
and may request information which it deems useful to its judgment, within a
time period provided for in the order. The President may decide to suspend

- 4 -

1. The names and profiles of applicants to Vacancy No. 040356,
which would list for each candidate: degree(s) and professional
certification(s); total years of human resources experience;
total years of Fund human resources experience; total years of
recruitment and staffing experience; total years of Fund
recruitment and staffing experience; total years of supervisory
and managerial experience; largest number of staff supervised;
gender; race; nationality; and date of birth;
2. The shortlisted candidates applications for the vacancy;
3. The Fund history of the shortlisted candidates as described in
their chrons (the People Soft report which details the Fund
history of a staff member); and
4. The resumes of the shortlisted candidates, on file at the time of
their application for the vacancy in question.
7. Applicant contended that the requested documents were relevant t