Judgment — ECLI:EU:F:2009:25
Date: 2009-03-12
Language of the case: German
Court formation: Second Chamber
Based on: Merger Treaty (1965)
Subject matter: Staff regulations and employment conditions - EC
Concepts: Conditions for admission;Admissibility and examination of applications, forms of order sought and pleas in law
Procedure: Staff cases - unfounded;Staff cases - inadmissible

Summary 1. Officials – Competitions – Conditions for admission – Fixing by the competition notice – Administration's discretion (Staff Regulations, Annex III) 2. Procedure – Application initiating proceedings – Formal requirements – Detailed statement of the pleas and arguments relied on before the Civil Service Tribunal (Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 21, first para., and Annex I, Art. 7(3); Rules of Procedure of the Civil Service Tribunal, Art. 35(1)(e)) 1. Notwithstanding its discretion, the selection board is bound by the wording and in particular by the conditions for admission laid down by the notice of competition. The same applies, in principle, to the administration, which is thus obliged to comply with the conditions for admitting applications if it is not to infringe the principle of equal treatment. (see para. 46) See: T-145/02 Petrich v Commission [2004] ECR-SC I‑A‑101 and II‑447, para. 34 F-12/05 Tas v Commission [2006] ECR-SC I‑A‑1‑79 and II‑A‑1‑285, para. 43 2. Under Article 35(1)(e) of the Rules of Procedure of the Civil Service Tribunal the application must contain a statement of the pleas and arguments of fact and law on which it is based. Those particulars must be sufficiently clear and precise to enable the defendant to prepare his defence and to enable the Tribunal to give judgment in the action, if appropriate without having to seek further information. In order to guarantee legal certainty and the sound administration of justice, it is necessary, for an action to be admissible, that the basic legal and factual particulars relied on are indicated coherently and intelligibly in the text of the application itself. That is a fortiori the case since, under Article 7(3) of Annex I to the Statute of the Court of Justice, the written stage of the procedure before the Tribunal comprises, in principle, only one exchange of written pleadings, unless the Tribunal decides otherwise. The latter specific feature of the procedure before the Civil Service Tribunal explains why, unlike proceedings before the Court of First Instance or the Court of Justice, in accordance with the first paragraph of Article 21 of the Statute of the Court of Justice, the statement of pleas and arguments in the application cannot be in summary form. Such flexibility would have the effect, in practice, of rendering redundant much of the subsequent special rule set out in the Annex to the Statute of the Court of Justice. (see paras 49-50) See: T-85/92 De Hoe v Commission [1993] ECR II‑523, para. 20; T‑154/98 Asia Motor France and Others v Commission [1999] ECR II‑1703, para. 42; T-277/97 Ismeri Europa v Court of Auditors [1999] ECR II‑1825, para. 29 F-1/08 Nijs v Court of Auditors [2008] ECR-SC I‑A‑1‑0000 and II‑A‑1‑0000, para. 25, on appeal before the Court of First Instance, Case T‑376/08 P