CELEX: 62017CN0233
Language: en
Date: 2017-05-04 00:00:00
Title: Case C-233/17 P: Appeal brought on 4 May 2017 by GX against the order of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 3 March 2017 in Case T-556/16: GX v European Commission

10.7.2017   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 221/12
            
         Appeal brought on 4 May 2017 by GX against the order of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 3 March 2017 in Case T-556/16: GX v European Commission
   (Case C-233/17 P)
   (2017/C 221/16)
   Language of the case: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Appellant: GX (represented by: G.-M. Enache, avocat)
   
      Other party to the proceedings: European Commission
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The appellant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               set aside the judgment under appeal and, consequently, annul the contested decision of the appointing authority;
            
         
               —
            
            
               pay compensation in respect of the material and non-material harm suffered on account of that decision;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the Commission to pay the costs.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   By his appeal, the appellant requests the Court to set aside the order of the General Court of 3 March 2017 in Case T-556/16, GX v Commission, by which his action for annulment of the decision of the selection board of open competition EPSO/AD/248/13 not to include his name on the reserve list of successful candidates in that competition, was dismissed.
   In support of the appeal, the applicant relies on two pleas in law:
   
               1.
            
            
               The illegality of the notice of competition, of the corrigendum, and of the Assessment Centre fundamental principles
               The appellant considers that the competition notice is unlawful insofar as it does not provide an objective justification either as regards the limitation of the choice of second language (German, English or French) in the light of the interest of the service or as regards the proportionality of that limitation with regard to the real needs of the service.
               Secondly, the appellant claims the illegality, lack of validity and of scientific foundation of the Assessment Centre fundamental principles governing EPSO open competitions as there is no support, evidence, or verification of the fundamental practices used at EPSO based on the following principles: (i) ‘past behavior is the best predictor of future performance’, (ii) ‘assessment centers, simulating real-life working situations, are the best predictor of real-life performance’.
               Thirdly, the appellant claims the illegality of a corrigendum published in competition EPSO/AD/248/13.
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Procedural irregularities at the Assessment Centre.
               The appellant raises a certain number of alleged procedural irregularities at the assessment center in competition EPSO/AD/248/13.