This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62007CA0016
Case C-16/07 P: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 9 October 2008 — Marguerite Chetcuti v Commission of the European Communities (Appeal — Civil service — Competition internal to the institution — Rejection of candidature — Conditions of admission)
Case C-16/07 P: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 9 October 2008 — Marguerite Chetcuti v Commission of the European Communities (Appeal — Civil service — Competition internal to the institution — Rejection of candidature — Conditions of admission)
Case C-16/07 P: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 9 October 2008 — Marguerite Chetcuti v Commission of the European Communities (Appeal — Civil service — Competition internal to the institution — Rejection of candidature — Conditions of admission)
OJ C 301, 22.11.2008, p. 7–8
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
22.11.2008 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 301/7 |
Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 9 October 2008 — Marguerite Chetcuti v Commission of the European Communities
(Case C-16/07 P) (1)
(Appeal - Civil service - Competition internal to the institution - Rejection of candidature - Conditions of admission)
(2008/C 301/13)
Language of the case: French
Parties
Appellant: Marguerite Chetcuti (represented by: M.-A. Lucas, avocat)
Other party to the proceedings: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: V. Joris and K. Herrmann, Agents)
Re:
Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) of 8 November 2006 in Case T-357/04 Chetcuti v Commission, in which the Court of First Instance dismissed the appellant's action for annulment of the decision of the competition selection board of 22 June 2004 rejecting her candidature and for annulment of the subsequent acts of the competition procedure — Infringement of Articles 4, 27 and 29(1) of the Staff Regulations in the version in force until 30 April 2004 — Concept of ‘internal competition’ and the objective assigned to recruitment of ensuring that the institution secures the services of persons of the ‘highest standard of ability, efficiency and integrity’ — Eligibility of auxiliary staff
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
|
1. |
Dismisses the appeal; |
|
2. |
Orders Ms Chetcuti to pay the costs. |