Post by account_disabled on Feb 19, 2024 23:06:50 GMT -7
In the absence of provision in the bases of the call for the selection process or because the regulations that regulate the selection process do not generally provide for it, it is not possible for a selection body or qualifying court to delegate [2] the evaluation of the applicants , although may count on the collaboration or assistance of experts or advisors to assess and evaluate the knowledge, skills or technical requirements of the applicants [3] .
It is not necessary to modify the jurisprudence on third parties in good faith who obtained a place in selective processes in which, by final ruling, the retroaction of the actions is provided so that they can be followed by the appellants in favor of whom the phases of the process fail. selective process affected by the defects determining the estimation of their claims.
Grades
[1] But this does not imply delegation: it Fax Lists occurs when the selection body, as delegator, cedes to the delegate - always another administrative body - the exercise of the competence of which it is the holder.
[2] Articles 9.1 and 2 and 17.2 of Law 40/2015 provide for the delegation of powers between bodies of Public Administrations but the possibility of using it is limited to "other bodies of the same Administration" and, in relation With the case at hand, neither the specialized members nor the consulting company have that condition.
[3] Regarding the case that is the subject of the controversy, the qualifying court could use, as collaborators, specialized members who could propose a certain assessment of the evaluable merits, but this auxiliary work does not exclude that it is the qualifying court that must, Before resolving on the matter, know them in their entirety and not only through a "detailed summary table of the assessment phase" "in anonymous format", since it is to the court that the bases entrust the decision. In the present case, the qualifying tribunal did not fully know the merits of the 199 applicants who reached that phase, but rather ratified what was submitted to it.
It is not necessary to modify the jurisprudence on third parties in good faith who obtained a place in selective processes in which, by final ruling, the retroaction of the actions is provided so that they can be followed by the appellants in favor of whom the phases of the process fail. selective process affected by the defects determining the estimation of their claims.
Grades
[1] But this does not imply delegation: it Fax Lists occurs when the selection body, as delegator, cedes to the delegate - always another administrative body - the exercise of the competence of which it is the holder.
[2] Articles 9.1 and 2 and 17.2 of Law 40/2015 provide for the delegation of powers between bodies of Public Administrations but the possibility of using it is limited to "other bodies of the same Administration" and, in relation With the case at hand, neither the specialized members nor the consulting company have that condition.
[3] Regarding the case that is the subject of the controversy, the qualifying court could use, as collaborators, specialized members who could propose a certain assessment of the evaluable merits, but this auxiliary work does not exclude that it is the qualifying court that must, Before resolving on the matter, know them in their entirety and not only through a "detailed summary table of the assessment phase" "in anonymous format", since it is to the court that the bases entrust the decision. In the present case, the qualifying tribunal did not fully know the merits of the 199 applicants who reached that phase, but rather ratified what was submitted to it.