CELEX: 62020TN0705
Language: en
Date: 2020-11-30 00:00:00
Title: Case T-705/20: Action brought on 30 November 2020 — OI v Commission

25.1.2021   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 28/63
            
         
      Action brought on 30 November 2020 — OI v Commission
      (Case T-705/20)
      (2021/C 28/93)
      Language of the case: French
      
         Parties
      
      
         Applicant: OI (represented by: S. Orlandi, lawyer)
      
         Defendant: European Commission
      
         Form of order sought
      
      The applicant claims that the Court should:
      
                  —
               
               
                  annul the decision not to include his name on the reserve list for internal competition COM/03/AD/18;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  order the European Commission to pay the costs.
               
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
      
      In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.
      
                  1.
               
               
                  First plea in law, put forward principally, alleging failure to adequately state reasons. The applicant takes the view that the statement of reasons consists of literal assessments, which are not consistent with the grades awarded. Moreover, the selection panel has not communicated the assessment criteria adopted before the tests, so that neither the applicant nor the appointing authority were able to check the legality of those criteria.
               
            
                  2.
               
               
                  Second plea in law, put forward in the alternative, alleging a manifest error of assessment committed by the selection panel since that panel was not in a position to justify to the requisite legal standard the manifest inconsistencies between the literal assessments and the numerical grades, having regard to a comparison with comparable assessments of other candidates.