Spadafora v Commission (Staff Regulations of officials and Conditions of Employment of other servants : Judgment) French Text [2017] EUECJ T-250/16 (05 December 2017)

Spadafora v Commission (Staff Regulations of officials and Conditions of Employment of other servants : Judgment) French Text [2017] EUECJ T-250/16 (05 December 2017)

The Tribunal found that the president of the pre-selection panel's statements prior to the selection procedure, favoring German over Italian candidates, created legitimate doubts as to her impartiality. The applicant was not given an opportunity to comment on evaluation documents, violating his rights of defence. These procedural defects were sufficient to annul the contested decisions. The Tribunal de la fonction publique erred in law by not recognizing the impact of these defects and by rejecting the applicant's claims as manifestly unfounded.

Citation
[2017] EUECJ T-250/16
Parties
Applicant: Sergio Spadafora; Respondent: Commission européenne
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
05 December 2017
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal and Substitution of Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; contested decisions annulled; case substituted and decided on the merits.
Legal Topics
Staff Regulations of EU Officials, Impartiality in Selection Procedures, Non Discrimination, Rights of Defence, Judicial Review of Administrative Decisions
EU Administrative Law Employment Law Staff Regulations of EU Officials Impartiality in Selection Procedures Non Discrimination Rights of Defence Judicial Review of Administrative Decisions

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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sergio Spadafora

Applicant

Commission européenne

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal and Substitution of Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the selection procedure for the post of Head of Legal Advice Unit at OLAF was tainted by lack of impartiality and procedural irregularities
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's rights of defence were violated by not being allowed to comment on documents submitted by the Commission
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal de la fonction publique erred in law in rejecting the applicant's claims as manifestly unfounded or inadmissible

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the president of the pre-selection panel's statements prior to the selection procedure, favoring German over Italian candidates, created legitimate doubts as to her impartiality. The applicant was not given an opportunity to comment on evaluation documents, violating his rights of defence. These procedural defects were sufficient to annul the contested decisions. The Tribunal de la fonction publique erred in law by not recognizing the impact of these defects and by rejecting the applicant's claims as manifestly unfounded.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; contested decisions annulled; case substituted and decided on the merits.

Orders

  • Annulment of the decision appointing another candidate as Head of Legal Advice Unit at OLAF
  • Annulment of the decision rejecting the applicant's complaint