You have a complaint against an EU institution or body?

Search cases

Text search

Document type

Institution concerned

Type of settlement

Case number


Date range


Discrimination [Article 5 ECGAB]

Or try old keywords (Before 2016)

Showing 1 - 20 of 217 results

Decision in case 1173/2019/UNK on the European Commission’s Medical Service alleged use of genetic data in a recruitment procedure

Monday | 16 December 2019

The complainant complained to the Ombudsman that the European Commission’s Medical Service had collected and used his genetic data during a recruitment procedure.

The Ombudsman found that the Medical Service did not collect the complainant’s genetic data.

The Ombudsman closed the inquiry with a finding that there was no maladministration.

Decision in case 771/2019/LM on how the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) selected ‘co-opted members’ for its Committee for Socio-economic Analysis

Tuesday | 10 December 2019

The case concerned the procedure for selecting ‘co-opted members’ of a committee which assists the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) in its work, the Committee for Socio-economic Analysis (SEAC). The complainant, who had previously been a member of the SEAC, was not selected for another term as a co-opted member. He complained to the Ombudsman that the selection procedure was not transparent or fair, and that the call for expressions of interest did not mention the possibility to appeal decisions.

The Ombudsman found no maladministration in the selection procedure. However, she suggested that ECHA give applicants the possibility formally to request a review of the decision not to select them as co-opted committee members.

Decision in case 1315/2018/LM on how the European Commission handled a complaint about how the national agency of Cyprus manages the Erasmus+ Youth Programme

Wednesday | 20 November 2019

The complainant is the president of two organisations that run Erasmus+ youth programmes in Cyprus. He complained to the European Commission about the behaviour of the Cypriot national agency, in charge of implementing the Erasmus+ programme at national level. In his view, the Commission did not investigate his complaint properly and he therefore turned to the Ombudsman.

The Ombudsman found that the European Commission had handled the complaints reasonably and in line with its role under the Erasmus+ Regulation. The Ombudsman therefore closed the case with a finding of no maladministration.

Decision in case 765/2018/PB about the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training and its handling of two recruitment procedures

Wednesday | 20 November 2019

The case concerned the way in which the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (Cedefop) conducted two staff recruitment procedures.

The Ombudsman found that, by not applying all the assessment criteria when assessing the applications, Cedefop had committed maladministration in one of the procedures. In light of the Court of Auditor’s recent call for immediate corrective action by Cedefop regarding its staff recruitment procedures and the fact that Cedefop’s management now seems intent on addressing the issues in question, the Ombudsman does not find it necessary to make a recommendation to Cedefop arising from her finding of maladministration.  

The Ombudsman, however, asked Cedefop to inform her within three months of this decision of all the measures it has recently taken, or plans to take, to improve its recruitment procedures. To promote public trust in its recruitment procedures, Cedefop should publish these measures on its website.

Decision in case 858/2018/KT on how the European Medicines Agency dealt with a request for reimbursement of travel expenses in a staff selection procedure

Tuesday | 22 October 2019

The complainant was dissatisfied with how the European Medicines Agency (EMA) had dealt with his request for reimbursement of travel expenses for attending a job interview. He argued that EMA’s reimbursement policy was unfair to candidates living outside the EU.

The Ombudsman noted that EMA is entitled to limit the reimbursement of travels costs and that it has a margin of discretion in deciding how exactly to do this. The Ombudsman found EMA’s rules to be reasonable and, on this basis, found no maladministration. She nevertheless welcomed the fact that EMA has since changed its rules for reimbursing travel from outside the EU, as the new policy has an even more rational calculation method.

Decision in case 303/2019/NH on the European Commission’s assessment of academic qualifications when selecting trainees

Monday | 07 October 2019

The case concerned how the European Commission assesses academic qualifications when it selects its trainees. The Commission rejected the complainant’s application due to “inadequate academic qualifications” as he had obtained his bachelor’s degree in two years instead of three. The Commission explained that it rejected all applicants with less than three years of studies.

In the course of the Ombudsman’s inquiry, the Commission admitted the complainant to the selection procedure for the traineeship programme. The Commission also changed its practice for assessing academic qualifications. It now accepts all applicants who have a three-year degree obtained in less than three years.

The Ombudsman closed the case as settled and welcomed the Commission’s decision to change its practice. She suggested to the Commission that it update its traineeship website to reflect better the new practice for assessing academic qualifications.

Closing note on the Strategic Initiative on the leave rights of certain EU staff members and the best interests of the child (SI/1/2019/AMF)

Tuesday | 01 October 2019

This strategic initiative aimed at assisting the EU institutions in protecting the best interests of children in their staff policies. To this end, the Ombudsman asked the European Parliament, the Council of the EU and the European Commission to inform her about their internal policies regarding the leave rights of staff members who become parents through surrogacy.

Based on the replies received, the Ombudsman encourages all EU institutions to adapt their internal rules so that the leave rights of staff members who become parents through surrogacy are clearly defined and aligned with those of other staff members who become parents.