Strasbourg, 25 October 2006

Dear Mrs L.,

On 24 October 2005, you made a complaint to the European Ombudsman against the European Personnel Selection Office ("EPSO") concerning the language in which you were invited to take tests, following a call for expression of interest for the recruitment of contractual agents.

On 11 November 2005, I forwarded the complaint to the Director of EPSO. EPSO sent its opinion on 17 February 2006. I forwarded it to you with an invitation to make observations, if you so wished. No observations have been received from you.

I am writing now to let you know the results of the inquiries that have been made.

THE COMPLAINT

According to the complainant, the facts can be summarised as follows:

The complainant is a contractual agent working for the Directorate-General for Enlargement of the European Commission. In June 2005, the complainant responded to a call for expression of interest launched by the European Personnel Selection Office ("EPSO") to constitute a database of candidates for recruitment as contractual agents. On 4 October 2005, EPSO informed her that her application had been considered eligible and she was invited to the tests.

On 21 October 2005, she sent an e-mail to EPSO, because she noticed a mistake in the language chosen for the tests, namely, she had chosen German, a language she does not know. She checked her CV on EPSO's website and found that German was mentioned among the languages she spoke. She stated that she might have made a mistake and asked EPSO to allow her to take the test in English.

On the same date, EPSO replied that nothing could be done.

Again on the same date, the complainant replied that she understood that it was impossible to modify her CV but asked if she could take the test in English.

EPSO confirmed that it was impossible to modify information filled in by the complainant.

In her complaint to the European Ombudsman, the complainant admitted that she had wrongly chosen German instead of Dutch. She also stated that, if she were allowed to take the tests in English, her contract might be renewed for an indefinite period. She requested help.

The complainant alleged that EPSO had wrongly rejected her request to take the tests in a language other than the one indicated, by mistake, in her application and mentioned in the invitation she received from EPSO.

The complainant claimed that EPSO should allow her to take the tests in English.

THE INQUIRY

EPSO's opinion

EPSO's opinion can be summarised as follows:

On behalf of the institutions of the European Union, EPSO launched in June 2005 a call for expression of interest aiming at constituting a database of candidates for recruitment as contractual agents. This call as well as a guide for the attention of candidates were published on the EPSO website. The call contained the requirements, the procedure to follow in order to apply, the way the tests would take place and more general information. The Guide provided candidates with practical information as regards the on-line registration.

Before the expiry of the relevant deadline, the complainant registered her application in accordance with the published procedure. During registration she chose French as her main language, and she selected German and English respectively as her second and third languages.

On 4 October 2005, EPSO informed the complainant that her application had been selected and that she was invited to take part in the tests.

By e-mails dated 21 October 2005, the complainant contacted EPSO and requested to take the tests in English and not in German. She explained that she noticed that German was wrongly indicated as her second language on her application form. As she was unable to modify the information on her application, she requested EPSO to do it.

On the same date, EPSO informed the complainant that it was not possible to accede to her request.

When the call for expression of interest was published, it was indicated under point A.3.b) that candidates had to possess a thorough knowledge of one of the 20 official languages of the European Union (main language) and a satisfactory knowledge of English, French or German (second language), the language in which the candidates would take the tests. Furthermore, it was stated under point C that candidates had to take the tests in their second language, which had to be different from their main language.

In the Guide for candidates, it was also indicated that the chosen language for the tests had to be selected from a drop-down menu. On the screen, the part called "Languages" was divided into three parts: "main language", "language for the tests", "other languages". The drop-down menu for the language for the tests allowed candidates to choose between English, French or German. Furthermore, the instructions on the last page of the Guide drew attention to the fact that, once all sections had been filled in, the candidates had to check the data before printing them. Thus, they had the possibility to change the information before it was definitively registered. On the EPSO website, candidates were advised to carefully read the Guide, which gave explanations for each stage of the procedure. Their attention was also drawn to the fact that all information provided by them had to be correct.

In the complainant's case, it was regrettable that she had not taken the time to check her application before registering it, although information and warnings had been provided for in the call.

Once candidates have validated information they have provided before the closing date, EPSO takes it into account, as provided, in order to constitute the database of candidates whose profile is compliant with the requirements and qualifications defined by the call. EPSO cannot modify information provided and validated by candidates. The invitations to tests are solely based on this information.

Given these various elements, EPSO, which was obliged to comply with the selection procedures as published vis-à-vis all candidates, is not in a position to invite the complainant to take the tests in English, instead of German, which had been chosen by her by mistake. All applications have been dealt with in accordance with the same rules, in line with the principle of equality of treatment, from which EPSO cannot depart.

The complainant's observations

No observations were received from the complainant.

THE DECISION

1 Alleged wrongful rejection of a candidate's request for change of the language chosen for tests

1.1 The complainant, a contractual agent working for the Directorate-General for Enlargement of the European Commission, responded to a call for expression of interest launched by the European Personnel Selection Office ("EPSO") to constitute a database of candidates recruited as contractual agents. On 4 October 2005, EPSO informed the complainant that her application had been considered eligible and she was invited to the tests. She noticed a mistake in the language chosen (German) for the tests and, therefore, asked EPSO to allow her to take the tests in English. EPSO refused to accede to her request.

The complainant alleged that EPSO wrongly rejected her request to take the tests in a language other than the one indicated, by mistake, in her application and mentioned in the invitation she received from EPSO.

The complainant claimed that EPSO should allow her to take the tests in English.

1.2 In its opinion, EPSO explained that the call for expression of interest indicated that candidates had to possess a thorough knowledge of one of the 20 official languages of the European Union (main language) and a satisfactory knowledge of English, French or German (second language), the language in which the candidates would take the tests. Furthermore, it was stated that candidates had to take the tests in their second language, which had to be different from their main language.

As indicated in the Guide for candidates, a drop-down menu for the language of the tests enabled candidates to choose between English, French or German. Furthermore, the instructions in the Guide drew attention to the fact that, once all sections had been filled in, the candidates had to check the data before printing them. In the complainant's case, it is regrettable that she had not taken the time to check her application before registering it.

Once candidates have validated information they have provided before the closing date, EPSO takes it into account, as provided, in order to constitute the database of candidates whose profile is compliant with the requirements and qualifications defined by the call. EPSO cannot modify information provided and validated by candidates. The invitations to tests are solely based on this information.

Given these various elements, EPSO was not in a position to invite the complainant to take the tests in English. All applications have been dealt with in accordance with the same rules, in line with the principle of equality of treatment, from which EPSO cannot depart.

1.3 The European Ombudsman first recalls that, in June 2005, EPSO launched a call for expression of interest and that the deadline for registration was 20 July 2005. The procedure to apply was explained in the call for expression of interest and in the application guide. According to the call, "[c]andidates will be asked to sit the tests in their second language (English, French or German) which must be different from their main language". The Ombudsman notes that the complainant admitted to having wrongly chosen German instead of Dutch as the language for the tests. He would like to point out that the drop-down menu allowed candidates to choose between English, French or German, only. Dutch could only have been chosen as the third language.

1.4 The Ombudsman also notes that, in its opinion, EPSO explained that it was not possible to modify data filled in by the complainant after the registration of her application for the following reasons:

- the invitations to the tests are based on the information which has been checked and validated by the candidates before the closing date;

- the application of different rules to candidates would breach the principle of equality of treatment.

1.5 The Ombudsman remarks that, according to the call for expression of interest, it was the responsibility of candidates "to complete [their] registration in time (no later than 20 July 2005 at 12.00 Brussels time)". Furthermore, candidates would "no longer be able to register [their] application once the deadline for the submission of registration has passed". He observes that the wording of the call for expression of interest is sufficiently clear in that no additional information could be provided after the closing date for registration.

1.6 The Ombudsman recalls that the principle of equality of treatment of candidates in competition proceedings is a fundamental principle of Community law(1). The Ombudsman takes the view that EPSO was entitled to refuse to invite the complainant to take the test in English because this could have resulted in unequal treatment of the candidates who had been diligent enough to send a correct application form before the closing date. This refusal was also in line with the deadline for registration set forth in the call for expression of interests.

1.7 Based on the above findings, the Ombudsman concludes that EPSO has provided valid and adequate explanations for its decision to reject the complainant's application. The Ombudsman has, therefore, found no maladministration by EPSO and considers that the complainant's claim cannot be sustained.

2 Conclusion

On the basis of the Ombudsman's inquiries into this complaint, there appears to have been no maladministration by EPSO. The Ombudsman therefore closes the case.

The Director of EPSO will also be informed of this decision.

 

P. Nikiforos DIAMANDOUROS

---

(1) See case T-173/99 Elkaïm and Mazuel v Commission [2000] ECR-SC I-A-101 and II-433, paragraph 87.