JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE (First Chamber)

16 April 1997

Case T-80/96

Ana Maria Fernandes Leite Mateus

v

Council of the European Union

‛Officials — Open competitions — Non-admission to tests — Professional experience required’

Full text in French II-259

Application for:

annulment of the decision of 3 October 1995 of the Selection Board in Open Competition Conseil/C/360 not to admit the applicant to the tests in that competition.

Decision:

Annulment.

Abstract of the Judgment

The applicant submitted her candidature for Open Competition Conseil/C/360, which was organized by the Council to constitute a reserve list of French-language secretaries, within the time-limit stated in the notice of competition (OJ 1994 C 345 A, French Edition only, p. 3) and using the official application form.

Together with the application form, she sent a certificate drafted in Portuguese by the company DSM Resinas de Portugal, Lda (hereinafter ‘DSM Resinas’), confirming that she had been employed by that company from 1 July 1973 to 7 June 1989 and, since 1 November 1982, had held the grade ‘1a. Escriturária’. She also sent a certificate and two statements confirming that she had worked at the Commission as an auxiliary secretary from 1 February to 15 September 1992 and from 16 September 1992 to 31 January 1993 and that that work had required knowledge of a word processing package.

One of the specific conditions for admission to the competition was that, on the date of publication of the notice of competition, candidates had two years' professional experience as a ‘secretary and/or typist. Candidates are required to prove, by producing supporting documents, that they fulfil that condition for admission to the competition. ’

By letter of 3 October 1995, the applicant was informed of the Selection Board's decision not to admit her to the competition, on the ground that she had failed to prove, by producing supporting documents, that on the date of publication of the notice of competition she had two years' professional experience as a secretary and/or typist.

Substance

The basic function of a notice of competition, according to the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities, is to give those interested the most accurate information possible about the conditions of eligibility for the post, in order to enable them to judge, first, whether they should apply for it and, second, what supporting documents are important for the proceedings of the Selection Board and must therefore be enclosed with the application. The notice of competition forms both the legal basis and the basis of assessment for the Selection Board (point 27).

See: T-158/89 Van Hecken v ESC [1991] ECR II-1341, para. 23; T-54/91 Almeida Amimes v Parliament [1992] ECR II-1739, para. 39

It should be noted that, when a notice of competition has been published by a Community institution, candidates fulfilling the conditions for admission set out in the notice, who provide proof of that by producing supporting documents together with a duly completed and submitted application form, are entitled to participate in that competition (paragraph 28).

Although it is not for the Selection Board faced with incomplete or ambiguous documents to contact the candidate for the purpose of clarifying die omissions and ambiguities, a phrase cannot be considered to be ambiguous simply because it is expressed in an official language of the European Communities other than that in which the notice of competition and the official application form are drawn up (paragraph 30).

See: Almeida Antunes v Parliament, para. 36

It is reasonably to be expected, if the Selection Board in a competition is not familiar with a specific term, that it should check the meaning of that term, for example by consulting a dictionary. The Selection Board may not avoid this requirement on the ground that it is not required to check the content of the documents submitted by candidates (paragraph 37).

See: Almeida Antunes v Parliament

In those circumstances, and in the light, firstly, of the applicant's professional experience at the Commission, the duration of which was one year, and, secondly, of her experience with DSM Resinas, the duration of which was almost 16 years and at least a significant part of which should be understood to involve work as a secretary and/or typist, the Council was wrong to consider that the applicant had failed to provide proof of at least two years' professional experience as a secretary and/or typist (paragraph 39).

It must therefore be held that the Selection Board committed a manifest error of assessment in not admitting the applicant to the competition on the ground that she had failed to provide proof of the professional experience required (paragraph 40).

Operative part:

The decision of 3 October 1995 of the Selection Board in Competition Conseil/C/360 not to admit Ana Fernandes Leite Mateus to the tests in that competition is annulled.

The Council is ordered to pay its own costs and the costs of the applicant.