Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
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

Document C2007/020/61

Case F-142/06: Action brought on 28 December 2006 — Bligny v Commission

IO C 20, 27.1.2007, p. 40–41 (ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, NL, PL, PT, SK, SL, FI, SV)
IO C 20, 27.1.2007, p. 39–40 (BG, RO)

27.1.2007   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 20/40

Action brought on 28 December 2006 — Bligny v Commission

(Case F-142/06)

(2007/C 20/62)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Francesco Bligny (Tassin-la-Demi-Lune, France) (represented by: P. Lebel-Nourissat, avocat)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

—

annul the decision of the selection board for competition EPSO/AD/06/05 of 7 December 2006 and that of 23 November 2006, refusing to admit the applicant to the competition and therefore to correct his written test;

—

find that the application form published on 15 May 2006 on the EPSO internet site for use by candidates of the competition was improper;

—

order the defendant to pay to the applicant the sum of EUR 5 000 in compensation for his loss;

—

Order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant, after passing the pre-selection tests for the above-mentioned competition, was not admitted to the next stage since, contrary to what was indicated in the notice of competition published in the Official Journal (1), he had failed to include with his application form any document proving his citizenship.

In support of his action, the applicant pleads breach of the principle of protection of legitimate expectations, of the principle of sound administration and of the duty to have regard for the welfare of officials. He submits in particular that, concerning citizenship, the model application form to be downloaded from the EPSO internet site merely required an honour declaration and warned candidates that, on request, they would have to provide documentary evidence.

(1)  OJ C 178 A of 27.7.2005, p. 3.

Top