- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case T-554/19: Action brought on 9 August 2019 — Spain v Commission
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62019TN0554
62019TN0554
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
23.9.2019
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 319/31
(Case T-554/19)
(2019/C 319/32)
Language of the case: Spanish
Parties
Applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: M. García-Valdecasas Dorrego, acting as Agent)
Defendant: European Commission
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—annul the competition notice; and
—order the European Commission to pay the costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments
The present action is directed against the notice of open competition — EPSO/AD/374/19 — Administrators (AD 7) in the following fields: 1. Competition law; 2. Financial law; 3. Economic and Monetary Union Law; 4. Financial rules applicable to the EU budget; 5. Protection of euro coins against counterfeiting. (1)
In support of its action, the applicant raises four pleas in law.
1.Infringement of Articles 1 and 2 of Regulation No 1/58, (2) Article 22 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’), and Article 1d of the Staff Regulations, as a result of the restriction of communication between EPSO and the candidate solely to English, French, German or Italian, and of the restriction of the languages that may be used when filling in the talent screener section of the application form.
2.Infringement of Articles 1 and 6 of Regulation No 1/58, Article 22 of the Charter, and Article 1d(1) and (6), Article 27 and Article 28(f) of the Staff Regulations, as a result of the improper restriction of the selection of the second language to four languages only (French, English, German and Italian), excluding the other official languages of the European Union.
3.The selection of English, French, German and Italian constitutes an arbitrary selection giving rise to discrimination on the ground of language, contrary to Article 1d(1) and (6), Article 27 and Article 28(f) of the Staff Regulations.
4.The fact that the competition notice fails expressly to specify that language 1 must be the language in which candidates have a minimum C1 level gives rise to double discrimination, on the ground of nationality and on the ground of the language ‘spoken’, thereby infringing Article 1d(1) and (6), Article 27 and Article 28(f) of the Staff Regulations.
(1) OJ 2019 C 191 A, p. 1.
(2) Regulation No 1 determining the languages to be used by the European Economic Community (OJ 1958, 17, p. 385).