W. H. M. Daemen v Commission of the European Communities. (Officials) [1993] EUECJ T-91/92 (16 December 1993)

W. H. M. Daemen v Commission of the European Communities. (Officials) [1993] EUECJ T-91/92 (16 December 1993)

The applicant failed to follow clear instructions regarding the use of self-copying paper, resulting in his name appearing in unauthorized places and breaching the rule of anonymity. The Commission's instructions were adequate for a diligent candidate, and the applicant was entirely responsible for the breach. The nullification of the paper was justified, and the application was dismissed as unfounded.

Citation
[1993] EUECJ T-91/92
Parties
Applicant: Applicant; Respondent: Commission
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
16 December 1993
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review of Administrative Decision / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Competition for Recruitment, Anonymity in Examinations, Procedural Fairness, Nullification of Examination Papers
Administrative Law European Union Law Competition for Recruitment Anonymity in Examinations Procedural Fairness Nullification of Examination Papers

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Applicant

Applicant

Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review of Administrative Decision / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the nullification of the applicant's examination paper for breach of anonymity was lawful
  2. 2 Whether the Commission provided adequate instructions and safeguards to prevent breaches of anonymity
  3. 3 Whether the applicant had an interest in contesting the decision

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to follow clear instructions regarding the use of self-copying paper, resulting in his name appearing in unauthorized places and breaching the rule of anonymity. The Commission's instructions were adequate for a diligent candidate, and the applicant was entirely responsible for the breach. The nullification of the paper was justified, and the application was dismissed as unfounded.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application dismissed
  • Each party to bear its own costs