The Canarian Justice rejects compensation to an opponent for the delay in the selection process

According to the judgment, dated April 18, the appeal is dismissed “because the existence of undue delay or unjustified delay in the selection process”, because, although he acknowledges that the procedure lasted beyond what was established by law, fifteen months, it was not due to administrative inactivity or laziness, passivity or abandonment on the part of the Administration.

In the opinion of the magistrate who signs the sentence, which can be appealed, Public function approved two resolutions with the aim of extending the termin 7 months and 15 days, in one case, and in three more months, the other, and the appellant did not challenge any of them, nor did a third party declare the month of August non-working.

In addition, it considers that the Administration has expressly stated the reasons it has relied on and that it has always acted in a manner consistent with them, and yet, the appellant never objected to them, despite being public and perfectly known by a person who works in the Administration.

Taking these premises into account, it was possible to react against the extension of the deadlines and the declaration of incapacity of August, and it was not made, the magistrate understands that there is no place now to claim a patrimonial responsibility to compensate the damages that may have been caused.

“The patrimonial responsibility – collects the sentence – cannot be used as a means to avoid the application of resolutions consented by the interested parties or as an alternative route to the filing of the corresponding resources to subject the legality of said resolutions to examination”.

Nor did the plaintiff react to the act of appointment and inauguration nor did it request the recognition of its retroactive effects, challenging them in a timely manner to correct the effects of the delay.

Cut deadlines

However, the Contentious-Administrative Court number 1 of Santa Cruz de Tenerife does criticize the Administration for its actions for not having expressly responded to the prior claim made by the opponentand, as a corrective to that malpractice, it releases him from paying the costs.

The Minister of Public Administrations, Justice and Security, Julius Perezhas considered that, “in any case, it is necessary to reduce the duration of the selective processeswhich currently last months or years, due to how their processing is regulated”.

In his opinion, “there is room for regulation that respects the guarantees and purity of examinations and evaluationbut that, in turn, shortens procedures and shortens deadlines”.