JUDGMENT OF THE CIVIL SERVICE TRIBUNAL
(Second Chamber)
29 November 2007
Case F-19/07
Georgi Kerelov
v
Commission of the European Communities
(Civil service – Open competition – Selection Board – Contact with members of the Selection Board – Non-admission to competition – Non‑inclusion on the reserve list)
Application: brought under Articles 236 EC and 152 EA, in which Mr Kerelov seeks annulment of the decisions of the selection board in open
competition EPSO/AD/43/06 of 6 December 2006 and 2 February 2007, respectively not to include him on the reserve list for
that competition and not admitting him to the competition, together with an order for the Commission to pay him fixed damages
assessed on equitable principles at EUR 120 491.28.
Held: The action is dismissed. Each party is to bear its own costs.
Summary
1.      Officials – Actions – Pleas in law
2.      Officials – Competitions – Selection Board – Decision excluding a candidate
(Staff Regulations, Art. 30)
1.      In an action questioning the lawfulness of a decision to exclude a candidate from a competition on the ground that he failed
to comply with the terms of the notice of competition by contacting members of the selection board, it is for the person concerned,
where there is sufficiently precise and consistent evidence in support of that fact, to provide proof to the contrary or,
at the very least, to provide an explanation or justification such as to call into question the plausibility of the allegation,
in order to enable the Tribunal to reach its decision.
(see para. 34)
See:
C‑204/00 P, C‑205/00 P, C‑211/00 P, C‑213/00 P, C‑217/00 P and C‑219/00 P Aalborg Portland and Others v Commission [2004] ECR I‑123, para. 79
2.      The selection board in a competition, which is authorised to draw up the list of suitable candidates under Article 30 of the
Staff Regulations, has the power to determine that a candidate has behaved improperly and to exclude him from the competition
in accordance with the terms of the notice of competition. The fact that the formal decision to exclude the candidate was
not communicated to him until after publication of the reserve list mistakenly containing his name is not capable of rendering
that decision unlawful, in the absence of any strict time-limit provided for that purpose by the relevant provisions of the
Staff Regulations, and of any breach of the principle of sound administration which the institution might thereby be alleged
to have committed.
(see para. 37)