ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION CIVIL SERVICE TRIBUNAL

6 June 2012

Case F‑54/12 R

Luigi Carosi

v

European Commission

(Civil service — Open competition — Non-admission to the assessment tests — Procedure for interim relief — Application for suspension of operation of a measure — Prima facie case — None — Specific conditions for admission to the competition — Professional experience)

Application: brought under Articles 278 TFEU and 157 EA and Article 279 TFEU, applicable to the EAEC Treaty pursuant to Article 106a thereof, in which Mr Carosi seeks, in particular, suspension of the decision of the selection board in open competition EPSO/AST/117/11 (‘the competition selection board’ or ‘the selection board’) not to allow him to take part in the assessment tests for that competition.

Held: The applicant’s application for interim measures is dismissed. The costs are reserved.

Summary

Officials — Competitions — Competition based on qualifications and tests — Conditions for admission — Fixing by the competition notice — Selection board’s appraisal of candidates’ professional experience — Judicial review — Limits — Competition in the secretarial field

(Staff Regulations, Annex III, Arts 2 and 5)

It is for the selection board in a competition to assess in each case whether the professional experience of each candidate corresponds to the level required by the notice of competition. It enjoys a discretion, under the provisions of the Staff Regulations concerning competition procedures, in assessing the nature and duration of the previous experience of candidates and its relevance to the post to be filled. In its review of legality, the Civil Service Tribunal must therefore confine itself to ascertaining whether the selection board’s exercise of that discretion was free from manifest errors.

In that respect, a selection board in a competition does not make a manifestly erroneous assessment in considering, when adopting a decision not to admit a candidate to a competition in the secretarial field, that a university degree and professional experience in the legal field in particular do not correspond to a diploma and professional experience in the secretarial field, respectively.

(see paras 35, 39, 40, 47)

See:

1 July 2010, F‑40/09 Časta v Commission, para. 58 and the case-law cited therein