- 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
Judgment of the Court of First Instance (single Judge) of 12 December 2007. # Carlo Pagliacci v Commission of the European Communities. # Officials - Open competition. # Case T-307/04.
ECLI:EU:T:2007:378
62004TJ0307
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
(Officials – Open competition – Failure to include candidate’s name on the reserve list – Breach of the notice of competition – Qualifications and professional experience required)
Application: for annulment of the decision of the selection board in competition COM/A/1/02, which gave the applicant insufficient points in the tests for his name to be included in the list of successful candidates.
Held: The decision of the selection board in competition COM/A/1/02, which gave Mr Carlo Pagliacci insufficient points in the tests for his name to be included in the list of successful candidates, is annulled. The Commission is ordered to pay the costs.
Summary
Officials – Competitions – Competition based on qualifications and tests – Conditions for admission
(Staff Regulations, Annex III, Art. 1)
It is for the selection board in a competition based on qualifications and tests to assess in each case whether the diplomas produced or the professional experience demonstrated by each candidate correspond to the level required by the Staff Regulations and by the notice of competition. It has a broad discretion in that regard and the Court of First Instance must confine itself to examining whether the exercise of that discretion was vitiated by a manifest error.
However, notwithstanding its discretion, the selection board is bound by the wording of the notice of competition as published. Consequently, it commits a manifest error of assessment in allowing a candidate whose degree does not fulfil the conditions of the competition notice to take part in a competition.
(see paras 36-38, 43)
See: T‑158/89 Van Hecken v ESC [1991] ECR II‑1341, para. 22; T‑244/97 Mertens v Commission [1999] ECR-SC I‑A‑23 and II‑91, para. 44; T‑214/99 Carrasco Benítez v Commission [2000] ECR-SC I‑A‑257 and II‑1169, para. 69; T‑139/00 Bal v Commission [2002] ECR-SC I‑A‑33 and II‑139, para. 35; T‑357/00, T‑361/00, T‑363/00 and T‑364/00 Martínez Alarcón and Others v Commission [2002] ECR-SC I‑A‑37 and II‑161, para. 61 and the case-law cited therein; T‑332/01 Pujals Gomis v Commission [2002] ECR-SC I‑A‑233 and II‑1155, paras 39 to 41; T‑25/03 de Stefano v Commission [2005] ECR‑SC I‑A‑125 and II‑573, para. 34 and the case-law cited therein