Back to EUR-Lex homepage

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search
You are here

Document 62018TN0242

Case T-242/18: Action brought on 18 April 2018 — VV v Commission

OJ C 231, 2.7.2018, p. 30–31 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

201806150741955322018/C 231/382422018TC23120180702EN01ENINFO_JUDICIAL20180418303121

Case T-242/18: Action brought on 18 April 2018 — VV v Commission

Top

C2312018EN3010120180418EN0038301312

Action brought on 18 April 2018 — VV v Commission

(Case T-242/18)

2018/C 231/38Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: VV (represented by: F. Moyse, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

—

Annul the decision of 19 June 2017 and, in so far as necessary, the rejection of the applicant’s claim of 18 January 2018;

—

Order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

By the present action, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the selection board of Open Competition EPSO/AD/322/16 — Administrators in the field of audit (AD 5/AD 7) (OJ 2016 C 171A, p. 1) not to admit her to that competition since she does not hold a university diploma attesting to completed studies of at least 3 years in the fields set out in the notice of that competition.

In support of her action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.

1.

First plea in law, alleging an insufficient statement of reasons of the contested decision.

2.

Second plea in law, alleging errors of assessment committed by the selection board in the evaluation of the information in the applicant’s application. The selection board disregarded the notice of competition in finding that the applicant did not have a level of education which corresponds to completed university studies of at least 3 years attested by a final diploma, required for admission to the competition.
Top