The case concerned a study produced by a research organisation under a contract with the EU Delegation to Guinea-Bissau. The organisation raised concerns about conditions related to the publication of the study, notably that it should be distributed free of charge. The organisation considered that this condition would effectively prevent the publication of the study as an academic book, as academic publishers are commercial entities who make profit on books they publish.

The inquiry demonstrated that the study had been commissioned under a ‘service contract’, as part of which the European Commission - which is responsible for the overall budget in question - acquired the ownership of the study. As such, the study was considered a ‘public good’, and the Commission was correct to insist that it be made available to the public free of charge.

The Ombudsman considered that it was reasonable of the Commission to insist that the study be distributed free of charge, given that it was produced using EU funds and thus should not be commercialised. Nevertheless, the Ombudsman found it regrettable that the Commission had specified in a clear manner the conditions regarding publication only after the study had been completed. The Ombudsman closed the case finding that no further inquiries were justified but made a suggestion to avoid similar issues occurring in the future.

The case concerned the decision by the European Research Executive Agency (REA) not to award a ‘seal of excellence’ to a proposal for EU funding under a 2023 call for proposals for the Marie Sklodowska-Curie Postdoctoral Fellowship (MSCA-PF), which is part of the EU’s Horizon Europe programme. REA had refused to award the seal of excellence to the proposal because the applicant was based in the United Kingdom.

The Ombudsman found that REA had provided a reasonable explanation for its decision, and acted in line with the applicable rules. As such, she closed the inquiry with a finding of no maladministration. However, she made a suggestion for improvement to REA that it provide to the complainant, and to other UK-based applicants in the same situation, an explanatory note and/or issue a public statement which clarifies the specific situation of UK-based applicants in the 2023 MSCA-PF calls for proposals, in particular in relation to the seal of excellence.