natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
A request for access to the documents concerned was therefore not justified at that moment, since it was still possible for the Selection Board to modify its decision.
Den 6 december pressmeddelande till ombudsmannen som december 2002.
The complainant received no reply to his le er of 19 November 2002.
Enligt de a pressmeddelande hade slig process skulle nu inledas.
The European Parliament’s opinion
Inledande anmärkning y rande i de
Decisions following an inquiry
Beslut e are till de handlingar som ingick i bilaga 3 och 4 till y randet, innan dessa handlingarna kunde off
THE DECISION
I sin skrivbetraktas som hemliga, skulle de komma a e off
The complainant’s allegations and claim
Ombudsmannen beslutade sedermera a
It appears from the Parliament’s opinion and the complainant’s observations that Parliament has taken steps to se le the ma er and has thereby satisfied the complainant.
2.1 enligt tvnr fakturor (av den 12 juli 2001 och den 28 februari 2002) och a
The Ombudsman therefore closes the case.
2.2 ersom man identifi erat vissa oegentligheter i samband med presentationen av fakturorna och a klaganden hi ills inte hade ge
3.2.2 The European Commission
UNDERSÖGNING
LATE PAYMENT OF GRANT FOR AIDS’ RELATED PROJECT
BESLUTEFTEREN nationernas interimsadministration i Kosovo) som ar gav anledning till misstankar om a a ande ov
THE COMPLAINT
48 och klaganden.
According to the complainant, the relevant facts were as follows:
Ombudsmannen anser emellertid a a avtal s b r o ande ev
Decisions following an inquiry
Beslut e agerande igad.
In its opinion, the Commission made the following comments:
PÅSTÅDD UNDERLÅTENHET ATT MOTIVERA AVSLAG PÅ ANBUD BETRÄFFANDE ÖVERSÄTTNINGSTJÄNSTER
The project received Community assistance through the EUROVITHA Community Programme on the fight against AIDS.
Beslut i klagomål 2024/2002/OV mot Europaparlamentet
On 27 March 2002, the Commission wrote to Professor H. and requested him to submit the final report, so that all the Community assistance could be paid.
I april 2002 ingav klaganden 11 anbud i anslutning till eantal anbudsinfordringar avseende entliggjorts av Europaparlamentet.
Since the Commission could not make any payment to parties with which it did not have a direct contractual relationship, it urged the Eberhard Karls Universität to submit the justifying documents required for the final payment by le er of 15 October 2002.
Vskrev till Europaparlamentet, fi ck hon den 3 oktober 2002 till svar a parlamentet hade granskat , men a emellertid om felen.
Decisions following an inquiry
Beslut e plats.
As a result, the Eberhard Karls Universität had proceeded to pay COGAM its contribution to the project for an amount of 8200 €.
Europaparlamentet uppgav eny ar anledningen till a anbudet avslogs.
THE DECISION
3 avseende grekiska.
It appears from the Commission’s comments and the complainant’s observations that the Commission has taken steps to se le the ma er and has thereby satisfied the complainant.
Den 29 januari 2003 skrev klaganden till ombudsmannen och upplyste honom om ae er klaganden inge sifelen i klagandens anbud.
DECISIONSFOLLOWING
BESLUTEFTEREN avslag.
WWP Ltd. subsequently invoiced the Commission for the final 40% and continued to press for payment throughout 2001 and into 2002. On 8 February 2002, the Commission informed WWP Ltd. that an EU financial Regulation had been broken because WWP Ltd. had made the programme before the contract was issued, that the final 40% would not be paid and that WWP Ltd. would have to repay the 60% already paid.
Efram till de a beslut, informerade parlamentet klaganden, i en skrivelse av den 30 september 2002, om det exakta antalet fel och typen av fel i de tv er e19 november felen skulle styrkas, svarade Europaparlamentet med v det skulle skicka fotokopior av de aktuella sidorna i anbudet med felen december 2002,
WWP Ltd. met with DG Agriculture and requested a meeting with the relevant financial and legal services to discuss the Regulation in question.
19 november 2002, dvs. samma datum som den skrivde fel som fanns i anbuden.
It had been made clear to WWP Ltd. from the pre-contract stage that it would need to produce work whilst the bureaucracy caught up with the reality of the deadlines.
I en skrivelse av den 30 september anbudet avseende alsfasen, e ning hade styrkts.
This situation continued for three years and was accepted by the responsible officials in various Commission DGs.
I samma skrivelse informerade Europaparlamentet klaganden om resultatet av den
Decisions following an inquiry
Beslut e det er a alsstadiet i enlighet med urv kationerna).
On the basis of the above, the complainant argues that either a change in the applicable EU Regulation was applied retrospectively, or that the breach of the Regulation, if any, was by the responsible Commission officials. cials.
V det hade informerat klaganden i e rekommenderat brev av den 22 oktober 2002 om a CRE-0203-EL-EP hade avvisats i tilldelningsfasen e ersom kvaliteten vtill priset.
The complainant claims that the Commission should reverse its position and pay the remaining 40% due with interest, as well as compensation for the complainant’s time spent on the ma er.
Samtliga anbudsgiv eom motiv sliga krav offentliggjorde Europaparlamentet dessutom e meddelande om kontraktstilldelning i EUT J ebbplats. a meddelande aehuvudkontrakt och t v Tilldelningsmyndigheten beslutade a erbjuda enbart tvantalet fyra reservkontrakt som uppge s i anbudsspecifikationen.
The Ombudsman forwarded the complaint to the Commission for an opinion.
De tilldela kontrakt e er al av ey e a inte tilldela den anbudsgiv
Failure to pay the amount due under a contract
Påstådd underlåtenhet a förklara varför anbuden avseende svenska och franska avvisats
1.1 The complainant is Managing Director of a company which produced a story that was cofunded by the Commission.
Klaganden e anbud i anslutning till olika entliggjorts av Europaparlamentet.
According to the complainant, Commission DG Agriculture informed the company that an EU financial Regulation had been broken because the company had made the story before the relevant contract was issued, that the final 40% would not be paid and that the company would have to repay the 60% already paid.
1.2 I si y rande uppgav Europaparlamentet a det, e er a earat klaganden a det skulle skicka fotokopior av de aktuella sidorna i anbuden med felen tydligt angivna.
The complainant claims that the Commission should reverse its position and pay the remaining 40% due with interest, as well as compensation for the complainant’s time spent on the ma er.
Dessa fotokopior skickades med rekommenderat brev den 13 december 2002, samma dag som klaganden ingav sitill ombudsmannen.
1.2 The Commission’s opinion states that, having reexamined the fi le in the light of the complaint to the Ombudsman, the competent departments of the Commission decided to pay the requested sum and that the necessary administrative steps will be made as soon as possible.
I sin skrivelse av den 29 januari 2003 uppgav klaganden a hon accepterade de fel som angivits
The Commission subsequently sent a copy of a le er confirming payment of the contested amount to the complainant’s bank account.
Påstådd underlåtenhet a förklarar varför anbudet avseende italienska avvisats ny ar
ALLEGED FAILURE TO MAKE FINAL PAYMENT IN RESEARCH PROJECT
a det informerat klaganden, i e rekommenderat brev av den 22
DECISIONSFOLLOWING
BESLUTEFTEREN rande och klagandens kommentarer a parlamentet vidtagit klaganden.
The complainant claims that the final payment should be made to the coordinator CHIRON in Italy, together with interest for the delay.
TILLGÅNG TILL HANDLINGAR I SAMBAND MED ALLMÄNT UTTAGNINGSPROV
THE INQUIRY
Beslut i klagomål 342/2003/IP mot Europaparlamentet
In its opinion, the Commission made the following comments:
Klaganden klarade inte delprov uteslutits genom en skriv agningen. Han informerades om a han .
The scientific deliverables of the contract were approved on 29 July 2002, and the fi le was then transmi ed to the Directorate in charge of the relevant budget.
Genom en skrivelse av den 21 oktober 2002 informerade u agningskommi én klaganden a u agningskommi én hade granskat hans delprov under si at si ursprungliga beslut a
The requested corrections did not arrive until 5 December 2002 and the payment was processed on 19 December 2002, but by then the budget for 2002 was already closed.
Den 12 november 2002 svarade u agningskommi én klaganden och vhandlingarna, e
Decisions following an inquiry
Beslut e han
Due to organisational problems within DG RTD, the necessary signatures, including those of the financial verificator and the authorising officer, could not be obtained until 11 July 2003. The payment was then transferred to CHIRON’s bank account on 21 July 2003.
Den 19 november 2002 skickade klaganden y erligare en skrivelse till u agningskommi én, i vilken han bestred ov han den 23 juli a u agningskommi arit motiverad vid den tidpunkten, e ersom agningskommi én asi det fortfarande v oktober 2002, vilket v agningskommi én fa ade det slutliga ck inget sv beslutet askrivelse av den 19 november 2002.
The Commission recognises that as of 5 December 2002, the payment was due and should have been executed within 60 days, i.e. by 5 February 2003.
I sin skriv u agningskommi éns v ge vis och a a besvara hans skrivelse av den 19 november 2002.
It will therefore initiate the payment of interest for the period from 6 February 2003 to 21 July 2003, as soon as it receives a direct claim from the complainant, which is necessary to authorise the payment.
BESLUTEFTEREN besvara hans det skrivelse av den 19 november verkade som klagandens skrivsamband med a y at.
The complainant confirmed to the Ombudsman’s services by telephone that Stockholm University had received the final payment and that the payment of interest was on its way, if not already at CHIRON’s bank account.
I sina kommentarer informerade klaganden ombudsmannen om a parlamentet hade skickat honom maj 2003 tillsammans med en skrivarat hans skrivelse av den 19 november 2002.
1.2 The Commission recognises that as of 5 December 2002, the payment was due and should have been paid within 60 days.
1.2 I siy rande beklagade Europaparlamentet aklagandens skrivelse av den 19 november besvara det verkade som
Decisions following an inquiry
Beslut e klagandens skriva y at.
Decision on complaint 207/2003/OV against the Court of Auditors
1.3 ade klaganden ahandlingarna redan den 26 maj 2003, tillsammans med en skrivparlamentet inte besvarat hans skrivelse av den 19 november 2002. Han u
He asked to be informed about a) the criteria used for the evaluation (marking) of the titles, degrees and professional experience, b) his mark and c) the mark of the last successful candidate.
Beslut i klagomål 1960/2002/JMA mot Europeiska kommissionen o de Lesbianas, Gays,
On 29 January 2003, the complainant lodged the present complaint with the Ombudsman, claiming:
Under 1996 och 1997 deltog klaganden tillsammans med andra bidragsgivare i e aids-relaterat projekt som kallades EUROVITHA och som samordnades av psykologiska institutionen vid universitetet i Tübingen i Tyskland.
1 that the Court of Auditors should inform him of a) the evaluation (marking) criteria of the titles, degrees and professional experience of the candidates, b) his mark and c) the mark of the last successful candidate;
Den 7 oktober 1997 beslutade kommissionen a fi nansiera en del av projektet (avtal SOC 97 20113505F02 ”Utv ar kommissionen och psykologiska institutionen vid universitetet i Tübingen, medan COGAM medverkade som dellev.
On 14 February 2003, the complainant sent additional information concerning his complaint.
Trots a COGAM:s bidrag till kontraktet avslutades i februari 200 euro.
He had received a reply from the Selection Board, which communicated the marks he obtained (0/10 for his degrees and 14.64/30 for his professional experience).
Som sv informerats om a uppfylla
Decisions following an inquiry
Beslut e samtliga underlev februari 1999, yrkar hon a ningar.
The Court of Auditors’ opinion
, e avtal med kommissionen om a
In addition, the complainant was informed that the last successful candidate obtained 32 points.
Kommissionens ekonomiska bidrag skulle betalas till huvudlevuniversitetet, sedan v
The complainant has now received all the information he requested.
I sin skrivelse uppmanade kommissionen kontraktstagaren a informera samtliga sina underlevsig. Den 7 juni 2002 mo
The complainant made no observations on the opinion of the Court of Auditors.
Eavtal med, uppmanade den Eberhard Karlsuniversitetet, i en skrivelse av den 15 oktober 2002, a
THE DECISION
859,30 euro till
1.3 It appears from the above that the complainant has obtained all the information that he asked for.
de hade kontaktat projektets samordnare mot bakgrund av den information rande.
This aspect of the complaint therefore appears to have been se led by the Court of Auditors to the satisfaction of the complainant.
De a resulterade i a Eberhard Karls-universitetet betalade
The claim for a re-examination of the complainant’s candidature
Klaganden avslutade med a ua fi
The complainant claims that his candidature should be reexamined.
BESLUTET rande och klagandens kommentarer a kommissionen vidtagit
The Ombudsman therefore finds no instance of maladministration as regards this aspect of the complaint.
Beslut i klagomål 205/2003/IJH mot Europeiska kommissionen
The Ombudsman therefore closes the case.
Kommissionen betalade 60 procent er fakturerade WWP Ltd.
Decision on complaint 1915/2002/BB against the European Commission and the Court of Auditors
Ltd. a skulle kommissionens olika generaldirektorat.
THE COMPLAINT
P grundval av ov
The audit took place during 16-18 January 2002.
UNDERSÖKNINGEN rande.
According to the complainants, the auditors stated that they would be submi ing their report to the Commission by the end of January 2002.
kungarikets utrikesministerium i v ordning hade betalat sin del av fi en kungariket ai enlighet med artikel 3 i ombudsmannens stadgar50
The ICCR supplied the Commission with the requested information, via email, on 14 June 2002.
I maj 2003 uppgav kommissionen a er aha betala
On 8 July 2002, the ICCR sent, on its own initiative, a full opinion on the Court of Auditors’ report to the fi financial officer of the Commission.
I juli 2003 skickade kommissionen en kopia av skriv a a det omtvistade beloppet betalats in till klagandens bankkonto.
On 29 August 2002, the ICCR informed the Commission that it could not accept Article 3.2 as a reason for suspension of the final payment.
Klagandens kommentarer ade per telefon till ombudsmannens sekretariat a han hade mobeloppet, inklusiv han v else av den 2 september
According to the complainants, the Commission did not reply to this le er.
AII.1 vid kommissionens GD Jordbruk, va
2) Non-payment of the outstanding final payment of € 80,671.61.
Underlåtenhet a betala det förfallna beloppet enligt avtal
The Commission’s opinion
I si y rande uppgav kommissionen a
In its opinion, the Commission made the following points:
, e er a betala det belopp det er en kopia av en skrivomtvistade beloppet hade betalats in till klagandens bankkonto.
The ongoing discussions with the ICCR started in the summer 2002.
Mot bakgrund av ov kommissionen har vidtagit klaganden.
The Commission requested additional information by le er dated 5 December 2002.
Slutsats rande och klagandens kommentarer a kommissionen vidtagit
On 13 May 2003, the Commission informed the ICCR that the final payment of € 50,821.03 had been made.
PÅSTÅDD UNDERLÅTENHET ATT ERLÄGGASLUTBETALNING I SAMBAND MED FORSKNINGSPROJEKT
The complainants’ observations on the Commission’s opinion
Beslut i klagomål 1173/2003/(TN)IJH mot Europeiska kommissionen
According to the complainants, the principle of transparency requires that these general issues should be addressed.
Stockholms universitet var en av deltagarna i eforskningsprojekt som samordnades av det CHIRON och som fi
Following the complainants’ reply to the Commission dated 27 May 2003, the Commission had proceeded to pay the remaining sum of € 20,447.79.
En del av denna slutbetalning vuniversitet. Det totala beloppet som kommissionen var skyldig CHIRON var 196 528 euro, av vilka 60 000 euro versitet.
The Court of Auditors’ opinion
I juni skickade
The Court of Auditors made, in summary, the following points:
2002 dokumentation till kommissionen och par veckor.
In some cases, it may also require corrective action by the Commission.
BESLUTEFTEREN forskningsprojekt med kontraktsnummer ERBBIO 4 CTT 960158.
Furthermore, the fact that the sector le er was sent in the present case with a slight delay, which by no means can be considered as undue, does not affect the interests of the complainants in any way.
Den 31 juli 2002 tog den fi finansielle initiativtagaren inom det direktoratet kontakt med samordnaren CHIRON med en den 5 december 2002 och betalningen behandlades den 19 december 2002 redan avslutad.
The complainants made, in summary, the following remarks:
P grund av organisatoriska problem inom GD namnteckningarna, bland annat den fi er till CHIRON:s bankkonto den 21 juli 2003.
According to the complainants, the auditor of the Court of Auditors told the ICCR that it is up to the Commission to decide whether the report is transmi ed to the ICCR.
december 2002 och aden borde ha v dagar, dvs. senast den 5 februari februari 2003 till den 21 juli det fi
Therefore, the amount of about € 9,000 could not be included in the final payment.
Stockholms universitet g, om den inte redan hade sa
1.1 In their observations, the complainants argue that this case raises general issues concerning delays by two Community institutions in responding to repeated requests for information and the length of the procedure.
1.1 till samordnaren av eforskningsprojekt med kontraktsnummer ERBBIO 4 CTT 960158, i vilket Stockholms universitet v Stockholms univ
The Ombudsman considers that this general issue cannot be dealt with effectively in the framework of the present inquiry.
P december 2002 och agrund av organisatoriska problem inom GD Forskning juli 2003.
The complainants have the possibility to present a new complaint to the Ombudsman, if they wish to do so.
Klaganden har mo agit slutbetalningen, a ar a Stockholms universitet g, samt a
2.1 The complainants allege lack of information by the Commission regarding the status of the audit and the final payment.
PÅSTÅDD BRIST PÅ INFORMATION OM UTESLUTNING FRÅN REVISIONSRÄTTENS UTTAGNINGSPROV
Ongoing discussions with the ICCR were initiated in the summer 2002.
Beslut i klagomål 207/2003/OV mot revisionsrä en agningsprovet CC/A/12/02 som organiseras av
DECISIONSFOLLOWING
BESLUTEFTEREN svar
3.5 Based on the information provided by the European Commission and the complainants, the Ombudsman finds that the Commission has se led the ma er and has thereby satisfied the complaint.
U agningskommi én meddelade a er agningsprov de var relev typ av arbetsuppgi er som u agningsprovet
4.1 The complainants claim that the Commission should take an official position on the audit and the procedures followed.
I punkt III.B.3 i u agningsmeddelandet anges emellertid a erligare examina och utan 10 de skriliga
4.2 The European Ombudsman considers that this aspect of the case is covered by the se lement reported in part 3 of the decision.
Klaganden angav slutligen ayrkeslivserfarenhet som antagits till de skriliga u agningsprovprovfebruari 2003 bad klaganden a
Alleged undue delay by the Court of Auditors
Information om u agningsförfarandet
In these circumstances, the Ombudsman does not consider the slight delay acknowledged by the Court of Auditors to constitute maladministration.
1.2 I siyklaganden i en skrivelse av den 30 januari erligare skrivelse av den 2 maj 2003 skickade dessutom klaganden a
The Ombudsman therefore finds no maladministration regarding this aspect of the case.
Kravet på en ny granskning av klagandens ansökan
DECISIONSFOLLOWING
Ombudsmannen anser a agningskommi én a
The various activities to be financed by this grant were to take place in September and October 1998.
Beslut i klagomål 1915/2002/BB mot Europeiska kommissionen och revisionsrä en
The complainant alleged that Mr H. had advised the association that it could begin to implement its project.
Kontraktet kallades ”Thematic Network contract nr 1999-TN.10869 ’TRANS-TALK’” och det omfa ades av det femte ramprogrammet.
According to the complainant, it had been on the basis of these assurances that the association had begun to realise its project.
De a kontrakt omfa ade en period av 18 , 2000 till slutet av juni ar 601 015 euro och
It appears that the bank insisted on obtaining wri en confirmation that the Commission would provide the grant.
Den 31 oktober 2001 meddelades ICCR arum den 16-18 januari 2002.
In a le er of 25 November 1998, Dr. B. (at that time the acting head of the Commission’s representation in Germany) confirmed that the Commission had approved the grant of 90 000 Ecu and that the relevant formalities would be fi finalised before the end of the year.
Enligt klagandena uppgav revisorerna a de skulle skicka sin rapport till kommissionen i slutet av januari 2002.
This application was lodged in February 1999.
ICCRjuli 2002 skickade ICCR y
However, in its decision of 28 January 2000 the Commission rejected the application.
I en skrivelse till kommissionen av den 12 juni e odaterat svar i augusti 2002, i vilket kommissionen uppgav atill artikel 3.2 i bilaga II till kontraktet.
It appears that this decision was based on the consideration that funds provided in 1999 could not be used to finance activities carried out in 1998.
Den 29 augusti 2002 informerade ICCR kommissionen aden inte kunde acceptera artikel besvarade kommissionen inte denna skrivelse.
The complainant then turned to another MEP who forwarded the complaint to the Ombudsman.
671,61 ork-kontraktet nr 1999-TN.10869 ”TRANS-TALK” och den en.
The complainant added that the association had no other funds and that if no solution could be found, it would have to cease its activities.
Klagandena yrkade aoff den drog felaktiga slutsatser i sin rapport och inge rapporten till kommissionen.
The Commission’s opinion
UNDERSÖGNING
On 31 May 1998, the association had applied for a grant of € 90.000 under budget line A-3024.
en drog slutsatsen a vissa angivna kostnader inte v det saknades styrkande handlingar. Deerfakturering av betalningsmo agaren anvsom underlev
Given that Mr H. had died in November 1999, it was no longer possible to verify what had in fact been said.
Den 28 februari 2002 informerade kommissionen ICCRoch dess granskning i samband med revisionen.
The fi le of DG X did however not contain any trace of these promises.
Diskussionerna med ICCR inleddes under en ade man kommissionen till ICCR i augusti 2002 ay erligare information i en skrivelse av den 5 december 2002.
In a le er of 30 June 2000, the Director-General had explained that the sum that could be taken in charge amounted to € 1988,54.
Enligt kommissionen kunde beloppet 29 799,63 euro inte beaktas, e
FURTHER INQUIRIES
821,03 euro hade a
Inspection of the Commission’s fi le
Klagandenas kommentarer till kommissionens y rande
Decisions following an inquiry ask for access to the Commission’s file.
Beslut e
It emerged that the fi le of DG X did not contain any originals of documents for the period up to 23 December 1998.
E er klagandenas svar till kommissionen av den 27 maj 2003 hade kommissionen betalat ut det
This copy contained a manuscript note by its author according to which the wording of the le er had been “agreed with Mr [H.]” (“mit H. [H.] abgestimmt”).
Esektorskriv er y erligare kontroller en och kommissionen.
On 8 November 2002, the Commission informed the Ombudsman that to its regret it had been unable to find any other documents in relation to the complainant’s application. The Commission asked the Ombudsman to consider this deplorable situation with leniency.
I det aktuella fallet hade sektorskrivelsen kontraktet ”TRANS-TALK”, skickats till den kommissionsledamot som var ansv er den elektroniska versionen er vidarebefordrades av denna sektorskrivelse till den sambandsansvemellertid som om en elektronisk kopia av den hemliga sektorskrivtill ICCR
In 1998, the association had applied to work as an info point for the Commission.
Klagandena gjorde sammanfa ens revisor sagt till ICCR a a