Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 14 July 2021 –
Carbajo Ferrero v Parliament

(Case T‑670/19)

(Civil service – Officials – Procedure of appointment to a director’s post – Notice of vacancy – Rejection of the applicant’s application and appointment of another applicant – Obligation to state reasons – Plea of illegality in respect of the measures setting the internal rules of procedure – Irregularity of the recruitment procedure – Manifest error of assessment – Inaccuracy of the information sent to the Appointing Authority – Transparency – Equal treatment – Liability – Material and non-material damage)

Actions brought by officials – Plea of illegality – Scope – Measures the illegality of which may be pleaded – Decision setting out the stages of a selection procedure – Challenge as part of an action against a decision rejecting the applicant’s application for a position – Admissibility

(Art. 277 TFEU)

(see paras 52-58)

Officials – Recruitment – Procedure for filling a director post – Decision setting out the stages of a procedure – Consideration of comparative merits – No indication of criteria for a comparative assessment of merit or of the rules for establishing the list of candidates recommended for an interview – No infringement of the principles of sound administration, equal treatment and legal certainty

(Staff Regulations of Officials, Arts 27(1) and 29(2))

(see paras 66, 67, 69-73)

Officials – Decision adversely affecting an official – Rejection of application – Obligation to state reasons – Scope – Observance of the secrecy of the selection board’s proceedings – Limits – Notification of the assessment criteria underpinning selection – Whether permissible

(Staff Regulations of Officials, Art. 25, second para.)

(see paras 94, 101)

Officials – Recruitment – Procedure for filling a director post – Consideration of the comparative merits of candidates – Obligation to define the comparative assessment criteria in advance – Scope – Different criteria applied at different stages of the procedure – Not permissible

(Staff Regulations of Officials, Arts 29(2) and 45(1))

(see paras 111, 112, 116-119, 124)

5.	Officials – Recruitment – Procedure for filling a director post – Consideration of the comparative merits of candidates – Obligation to notify the appointing authority of the comparative assessment criteria – Scope (Staff Regulations of Officials, Arts 29(2) and 45(1)) (see para. 113, 121-124)

Officials – Vacancy notice – Purpose – Consideration of the comparative merits of candidates – Administration’s discretion – Limits – Observance of the conditions laid down in the vacancy notice – Judicial review – Limits – Submission of inaccurate information as to a candidate’s experience to the appointing authority – Not permissible

(Staff Regulations of Officials, Art. 29(2))

(see paras 133-137, 142-145)

Re:

Application under Article 270 for, first, annulment of the decision of the Parliament of 10 December 2018 rejecting the applicant’s application and appointing another applicant to the post of director for media in the Directorate-General for Communication, and, secondly, for compensation for the damage the applicant allegedly suffered owing to that decision.

Operative part

The Court:

1.	Annuls the decision of the European Parliament of 10 December 2018 rejecting the applicant’s application and appointing another applicant to the post of director for media in the Directorate-General for Communication;

2.	Orders Parliament to pay the sum of EUR 40000 to the applicant in compensation for material damage;

3.	Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

4.	Orders the Parliament to pay the costs.