Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62009FA0009

Case F-9/09: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 28 October 2010 — Vicente Carbajosa and Others v Commission (Staff case — Open competitions EPSO/AD/116/08 and EPSO/AD/117/08 in the field of fraud prevention — Act adversely affecting the applicants — Exclusion of candidates following results obtained in admission tests — EPSO not competent)

SL C 13, 15.1.2011, p. 37–37 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

15.1.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 13/37


Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 28 October 2010 — Vicente Carbajosa and Others v Commission

(Case F-9/09) (1)

(Staff case - Open competitions EPSO/AD/116/08 and EPSO/AD/117/08 in the field of fraud prevention - Act adversely affecting the applicants - Exclusion of candidates following results obtained in admission tests - EPSO not competent)

2011/C 13/71

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Vicente Carbajosa and Others (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: S. Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis and É. Marchal, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and B. Eggers, agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision adopting and publishing the competition notices EPSO/AD/116/08 and EPSO/AD/117/08 and the decisions relating to the correction of the pre-selection tests and the written tests and the awarding of marks for the oral tests.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

1.

Annuls the decisions of the European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) not to admit Ms Vicente Carbajosa in respect of the competition EPSO/AD/117/08 and Ms Lehtinen and Ms Menchén in respect of the competition EPSO/AD/116/08 onto the list of candidates invited to submit a full application;

2.

Dismisses the remainder of the action as being inadmissible;

3.

Orders the European Commission to pay the costs.


(1)  OJ C 82 of 04.04.2009, p. 37.


Top