Showing 1 - 20 of 76 results
Decision in case 784/2019/JN on the European Commission´s decision to reject certain costs in the context of an EU-funded project supporting education in Somalia
Tuesday | 13 October 2020
The case concerned the European Commission´s decision to reject almost EUR 50 000 in the context of an EU-funded project supporting education in Somalia.
The Ombudsman made the preliminary finding that the Commission´s decision was not fair. She made a corresponding proposal for a solution.
The Commission disagreed with the Ombudsman´s proposal and provided additional explanations for its position. The grant agreement, it said, contains a list of non-eligible costs including salary costs of the personnel of national administrations, at issue here. Declaring the costs eligible, although they are clearly ineligible, could create a precedent that the rules in question can be circumvented. In light of these and further explanations, the Ombudsman reached the conclusion that no further inquiries were justified. The grant agreement, read as a whole, supports the Commission´s position sufficiently.
However, the Ombudsman considered it regrettable that an organisation that successfully carried out a project in good faith and incurred the costs in question, should find itself in this situation. She suggested that the Commission consider how it could improve the clarity of the information in its ‘grant agreements’ with entities selected to carry out EU-funded projects, to avoid similar cases arising in the future.
Decision in case 842/2020/KR on the European Commission’s decision to suspend a company that offers courses on the Erasmus+ ‘School Education Gateway’ platform
Thursday | 08 October 2020
The case concerned the ‘School Education Gateway’, an online platform for school education that is funded by Erasmus+, the EU's programme to support education, training, youth and sport in Europe. The complainant is the owner and manager of an education and training provider, which offered courses on the platform.
The European Commission, which is responsible for the programme, suspended the complainant’s company after it had established that the complainant’s company had repeatedly violated the platform’s terms and conditions.
The Ombudsman inquired into the matter and found that the Commission’s actions were reasonable and proportionate. She therefore closed the inquiry with a finding of no maladministration.
Decision in case 1106/2020/MDC on the European Commission’s refusal to grant the complainant an expatriation allowance
Tuesday | 25 August 2020
Allegedly wrongful exclusion from a European Commission public procurement procedure for translation services
Tuesday | 30 June 2020
Decision in case 1708/2019/NH on the EU Publications Office refusing to publish a notice for tender in the Official Journal of the European Union
Friday | 08 May 2020
The case concerned the refusal by the EU Publications Office to publish a contract notice in the Official Journal of the EU because it contained text in more than one language. The complainant, who works for a Belgian cultural foundation, contended that the Publications Office had failed to give the legal basis for its refusal.
In the course of the Ombudsman inquiry, the Publications Office gave the legal basis for refusing to publish the complainant’s notice. It also explained how it handles issues of this kind.
The Ombudsman closed the inquiry with the finding that the Publications Office had settled the aspect of the complaint that concerned the legal basis for the refusal to publish the contract notice. The Ombudsman further found that the Office’s explanations as to how it handles issues of this nature do not reveal any maladministration. The Ombudsman made a suggestion for improvement to ensure that language requirements are clearly explained on the Publication Office’s website.
The Innovation and Networks Executive Agency’s decision to reject costs claimed by an organisation that carried out an EU-funded project on air traffic management
Thursday | 30 April 2020
Decision of the European Ombudsman in the case 103/2020/JN on the Innovation and Networks Executive Agency’s decision to reject costs in the context of an EU-funded project aiming at developing the EU Air Traffic Management system
Wednesday | 29 April 2020
The fairness of the Commission’s decision to recover EU funds in the context of an EUfunded project aiming to help vulnerable social groups in Uzbekistan
Friday | 13 March 2020
Proposal of the European Ombudsman for a solution in case 784/2019/JN on the European Commission´s decision to reject certain costs in the context of an EU-funded project supporting education in Somalia
Tuesday | 03 March 2020
Decision in case 2011/2019/LM on how the European Commission dealt with the fact that the wrong deadline was given for traineeship applicants to upload supporting documents
Wednesday | 19 February 2020
The complainant applied for a traineeship at the European Commission and was asked to submit supporting documents. When she checked her online application account, she noticed that the deadline set for doing so had already expired by six months. When she logged in again, one week later, she learned that the actual deadline had expired earlier that day. Dissatisfied with the Commission’s decision to exclude her from the selection procedure, she turned to the Ombudsman.
The Ombudsman finds it regrettable that the Commission initially gave an incorrect deadline in the application accounts. While the Commission corrected the error within 15 minutes, it was alerted to the fact that some candidates had seen it. As such, it should have sent a notification to all candidates about the correct deadline.
At the same time, the complainant herself was required to check her application account at least twice a week and, in this case, failed to do so. It was therefore reasonable for the Commission not to accept her supporting documents. The Ombudsman closes the case, welcoming the steps the Commission has taken to avoid similar mistakes happening in the future.
Decision in case 2194/2018/AMF on how the European Anti-Fraud Office handled an investigation concerning a former judge of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal
Tuesday | 10 December 2019
Decision in case 306/2018/JAP concerning how the European Commission dealt with an audit of three EU-funded projects
Tuesday | 26 November 2019
The complainant took part in three EU-funded projects in the context of the 7th Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development. Its complaint to the Ombudsman concerned how the European Commission dealt with an audit of the expenditure claimed in the context of the projects.
The auditors found that the complainant’s time-recording system was unreliable. They asked the complainant to provide alternative evidence to substantiate the costs for personnel and other actions. The complainant submitted a number of documents to prove the costs incurred in the projects. However, the Commission rejected them as unreliable and, according to the complainant, decided to recover more than EUR 225 000.
The Ombudsman opened an inquiry into how the Commission dealt with the audit, and its decision to recover funds. Her inquiry team met with the Commission’s representatives and inspected its file.
The Ombudsman found that the Commission took the complainant’s allegation that the audit was badly conducted seriously, investigated the matter and assessed the alternative evidence provided.
While the Ombudsman recognises the Commission’s duty to safeguard the financial interests of the EU and acknowledges its efforts to obtain alternative evidence from the complainant, she was not convinced that, by rejecting the personnel costs in full, the Commission had adopted a fair or proportionate approach. Since the Commission, on three separate occasions, rejected a request to consider at least a partial waiver of the recovery, the Ombudsman concluded that further inquiries were unlikely to serve any purpose. She makes a suggestion for improvement to seek to avoid similar cases occurring in future.
How the European Commission dealt with a complaint concerning erroneous information about the deadline for traineeship applicants to upload supporting documents
Thursday | 21 November 2019
The EU Publications Officeʹs alleged failure to give valid reasons for its decision not to publish a notice for tender in the Official Journal of the European Union
Monday | 07 October 2019
Decision in case 502/2019/KT on the European Commission’s refusal to reimburse the hotel costs of a freelance interpreter
Thursday | 19 September 2019
The case concerned the European Commission’s refusal to reimburse the costs of a freelance interpreter who had to stay one night in a hotel for work purposes. The Commission considered that the hotel invoice was incomplete. The complainant, who had unsuccessfully tried to obtain from the hotel an invoice with the required information, contended that the Commission´s refusal was unfair.
While the Ombudsman understands the complainant´s sense of grievance, she accepted the Commission’s refusal to reimburse the hotel costs. The refusal was in line with the applicable rules, which are put in place to ensure proper use of public money and therefore have to be equally applied to all. The Ombudsman therefore closed the case with a finding of no maladministration.
Decision in case 1152/2018/JN on the fairness of the Research Executive Agency’s decision to recover funds
Thursday | 22 August 2019
The case concerned the Research Executive Agency’s decision to recover a part of its financial contribution to a project in the area of crisis management. The complainant, who represents a company having participated in the project, argued that the decision was unfair in its respect.
The Ombudsman re-examined the decision in the context of the case and found no maladministration.
Decision of the European Ombudsman in the above complaint on the failure of the European Commission to accommodate the needs of associations of staff members with a disability to participate remotely in the plenary session of the Management Committee for Sickness Insurance
Monday | 05 August 2019
The European Commission’s rejection of certain costs incurred by a beneficiary in an EU funded project tackling the situation of unemployed young people in Slovenia and Croatia
Thursday | 01 August 2019
The decision of the European Parliament’s Liaison Office in Croatia to block the complainant on its Facebook page
Tuesday | 30 July 2019
Decision in case 1490/2017/JAP on the European Commission’s rejection of costs incurred in a project aimed at tackling the unemployment of young people in Slovenia and Croatia
Tuesday | 30 July 2019
The case concerned the Commission’s rejection of costs related to the administration and implementation of a project aimed at tackling the unemployment of young people in Slovenia and Croatia. The Commission refused to make the final payment of some EUR 24 000. It argued that the corresponding costs which were due to an increase in the working days of a number of employees were exaggerated.
The Ombudsman found that the Commission had not taken into account the extension of time necessary to complete the project. Given that an extension had been granted, it was reasonable to expect that the number of working days would increase as well. She considered the Commission’s conduct inconsistent and asked the Commission to reconsider its position.
The Commission reassessed its position but, invoking the principle of sound financial management, decided not to allow any further costs.
The Ombudsman closed the inquiry as there was no prospect for a positive result for the complainant. To avoid similar problems in the future, the Ombudsman suggested that the Commission sensitise beneficiaries taking over the implementation of projects to the need of resubmitting an updated estimated budget and working time arrangements.