The case concerned a request for public access to documents related to the expenses of a university in the context of an EU-funded project. The complainant had submitted his request to the European Commission in July 2025.

The Commission first replied in September 2025. It identified ten documents as falling within the scope of the access request, to which it refused to give public access in their entirety. In doing so, the Commission argued that disclosure could undermine the commercial interests of the university concerned.

The complainant contested the Commission's decision by making a 'confirmatory application' in September 2025. When the Commission failed to provide an explicit reply, the complainant turned to the Ombudsman in October 2025.

The Ombudsman opened an inquiry into the Commission’s implicit refusal to grant public access and, as a first step, asked the Commission to adopt an explicit reply to the complainant’s confirmatory application as soon as possible. In the absence of a reply within the time limit set, the Ombudsman inquiry team inspected the documents in question, along with documentation on the consultation of the university concerned.

The Commission replied to the complainant in May 2026, granting wide partial access to the documents at issue. The complainant, in his comments on the Commission’s confirmatory decision, did not challenge the remaining redactions. The Ombudsman therefore considered that the complaint into the Commission’s implicit refusal of access had been settled by the access now granted. That said, the Ombudsman regretted the delay incurred by the Commission in handling the complainant’s access request, which persisted even after she had opened her inquiry. The Ombudsman continues to closely monitor the matter of delays based on complaints submitted to her.

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.