—

The Management Board’s decision states that ‘the reference to the award of “a diploma” in the relevant vacancy notice is deemed to correspond to the reference to the award of a “qualification certifying the completion of the level of studies”, given that the completion of the required level of studies by candidates is attested by the diplomas they possess’;

—

The Staff Regulations, which prevail over any Management Board decision, do not define ‘qualification’ strictly as a diploma but merely state, in Article 28(d) thereof, that an official may be appointed only on condition that:

‘he has, subject to Article 29(2), passed a competition based on either qualifications or tests, or both qualifications and tests, as provided in Annex III’;

—

The word ‘qualification’ is being considered as necessarily a diploma, when had it been intended to mean as such, it would have been specified. In fact, both the Staff Regulations and the European Glossary on Education (cited by the Management Board in its decision) seem to claim that there is a difference between the two. In this respect, a qualification might be attained merely by examination grades which certify a particular level of academic achievement.

—

The Europass Diploma Supplement, issued by the University of Malta in 2016, clearly outlines that the equivalent level required was attained in 2013;

—

This document has been developed by the European Commission, Council of Europe and UNESCO/CEPES. As the document itself claims, its purpose is to provide sufficient independent data to improve the international ‘transparency’ and fair academic and professional recognition of qualifications. Therefore, there is no legitimate reason why the equivalent level required which, as the Official Diploma Supplement proves, was attained in 2013, is not being recognised. The view that qualifications are necessarily attested by diplomas, excluding official documentation which is developed, inter alia, by the European Commission, is unjustified, as otherwise the Europass Diploma Supplement would be futile.

—

Candidates who withdraw from their Bachelor’s degree after two years or more are eligible for diploma equivalent to the educational component required in the vacancy;

—

Therefore, the applicant considers the same time of two years to fulfil the purpose equally. Otherwise, the seemingly discriminatory situation would arise whereby candidates might have more educational attainment than required for the post, but be considered ineligible merely because the final diploma was issued after the year at which the required level was reached, even if they possessed official certification from a university of an EU Member State as part of such diploma provided for such purposes. Therefore, to withdraw a job offer merely on the basis that the diploma was issued later only by virtue of it covering another level is discriminatory and disproportionate due to a simplistic and rigid interpretation that is unjustified.