—

annul, pursuant to Article 263 TFEU and Article 51(1)(a) of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union, notice of open competition EP/AD/304/2024, to draw up a list of 10 suitable candidates of Luxembourgish nationality to be recruited as administrators (grade AD 6) for the Secretariat of the European Parliament, published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 15 April 2024, Series C;

—

annul or, in any event, declare inapplicable pursuant to Article 277 TFEU, the general implementing provisions giving effect to Article 27 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union, adopted on 21 November 2022 by the Bureau of the European Parliament in relation to Articles 1 and 2 thereof and, accordingly, annul the aforementioned notice;

—

annul the reserve list drawn up further to the competition to which the notice to be annulled relates;

—

order the European Parliament to pay the costs.

1.

Failure to state reasons (Article 296 TFEU), in that it is merely asserted apodictically that there exist significant imbalances between nationalities within the services of the European Parliament to the detriment of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, which can be overcome only by means of notices of competitions reserved for nationals of that Member State.

2.

Failure to carry out a proper inquiry and infringement of the principle of sound administration (Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union), in that the inquiries and facts on which the European Parliament relied in order to reach such a conclusion are unknown.

3.

Direct infringement of Article 27 of the Staff Regulations and the rules on the application thereof issued by the European Parliament by decision of 21 November 2022. To that end, it is claimed that it is neither asserted nor demonstrated that the restrictive requirement that those provisions establish for notices of competitions reserved for nationals of a specific Member State has been met.

4.

Infringement of the principle of proportionality, in that the discriminatory measure, even taking into consideration the questionable inquiries on which that measure is based, is disproportionate to the objective pursued.

5.

Infringement of the rules and principles applicable in matters of language equality in competitions (Article 1d(6) of the Staff Regulations and Article 1(1)(f) of Annex III to the Staff Regulations), recently reiterated by the General Court in its judgment of 8 May 2024, France v Commission (T-555/22), from which it follows that notices of competitions limited to specific nationalities lead unnecessarily to the restriction of the number of languages that can be used in a competition to those of the nationalities concerned.

As regards the two contested acts, the Italian Government relies on the following pleas in law:

6.

Misuse of power and infringement of the substantive rules inherent in the nature and purpose of notices of competition.

7.

Infringement of Article 27(2) of the Staff Regulations and breach of the principle of proportionality.

8.

Failure to state reasons (infringement of Article 296 TFEU and of Article 41(2), third indent, of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union).