The Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market's language policy regarding its website and its correspondence with citizens

Available languages: bg.es.cs.da.de.et.el.en.fr.ga.it.lv.lt.hu.mt.nl.pl.pt.ro.sk.sl.fi.sv
  • Case: 2413/2010/MHZ
    Opened on 15 Dec 2010 - Decision on 13 Dec 2011
  • Institution(s) concerned: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market - Trade Marks and Designs
  • Field(s) of law: General, financial and institutional matters
  • Types of maladministration alleged – (i) breach of, or (ii) breach of duties relating to: Lawfulness (incorrect application of substantive and/or procedural rules) [Article 4 ECGAB],Absence of discrimination [Article 5 ECGAB],Reply to letters in the language of the citizen, indicating the competent official [Articles 13 and 14 ECGAB]
  • Subject matter(s): Institutional and policy matters
Books
Author:
Copyright: Stocklib © Oleksiy Mark

Summary of decision on complaint 2413/2010/MHZ against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market

The complainant, a Polish citizen, alleged that the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) replied in English to his letter which was written in Polish, and that the OHIM website was only available in OHIM's working languages (English, French, German, Spanish, and Italian). He considered this to be unlawful and turned to the Ombudsman.

The Ombudsman opened an inquiry and succeeded in convincing OHIM to change its language policy. He did not agree with OHIM's initial view that the OHIM Basic Regulation, together with the judgment in Kik, constitutes the legal basis for its practice of using only English, French, German, Spanish, and Italian in its website. Moreover, he could not exclude that this practice would put legal and natural persons coming from Member States other than Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Italy, and Spain at a disadvantage when compared to persons originating from those countries. He emphasised that, when a citizen first visits the OHIM website, he would find it much easier to navigate it if all the language versions were available. He argued that good administrative practice requires that, as far as possible, the institutions, bodies, offices, and agencies of the EU provide information to citizens in their own language. He further stated that administrative convenience is not a valid argument for an EU administration well equipped in terms of technical and human resources not to make its websites available in all EU languages.

As a result of the Ombudsman's inquiry, OHIM introduced important changes. First, it decided to accept written queries from any citizen of the Union, in any one of the languages mentioned in Article 55(1) TEU, and to provide an answer in the same language. Second, it accepted the Ombudsman's proposal for a friendly solution. It thus made the homepage of its website available in all EU languages and explained its language policy thereon. The Ombudsman applauded this commendable stance.