Notice for the OJ

 

Action brought on 15 July 2002 by María-Angeles Martínez Valls against European Parliament

    (Case T-214/02)

    (Language of the case: French)

An action against the European Parliament was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 15 July 2002 by María-Angeles Martínez Valls, residing in Brussels, represented by Georges Vandersanden and Laure Levi, lawyers.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

(annul the decision of the Selection Board in competition PE/90/A of 3 April 2002 refusing to admit the applicant to the next stages in the competition for having obtained insufficient marks in one of the written tests (test C) and annul the decision of the Selection Board in competition PE/90/A of 31 May 2002 confirming its decision of 3 April 2002 and rejecting the applicant's request seeking access to certain documents;

(annul the whole of the competition;

(at the very least, annul all the aspects and acts of the competition subsequent to the unlawful elements of the individual decisions of 3 April 2002 and 31 May 2002, in particular, the list of successful candidates and the appointments made on the basis of that list;

(in any event, order the defendant to adopt all the necessary measures in order to restore the applicant's rights as a candidate who has passed tests A, B and C of the competition in question;

(failing that, order the defendant to pay damages assessed, at the material time, at EUR 10 389.46, subject to increment;

(order the defendant to produce the corrected copy of test C and general and objective assessment criteria, to identify the publicly accessible documents which the Board used when marking test C and to produce the Board's reasoned report;

(order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant alleges breach of the duty to provide reasons, breach of the general principle of transparency, breach of the principle patere legem quem ipse fecisti and breach of the principle of non-discrimination. According to the applicant, the European Parliament was required to allow her access to her corrected written paper and to the criteria on which the Board assessed it.

The applicant further alleges infringement of the competition notice and a manifest error of assessment. In her view, the Selection Board laid down for itself too strict a set of criteria against which to assess the test.

____________