Mostrando 1 - 20 de 78 resultados
How the European Commission and the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) set up the EU Database for Information on Substances of Concern In Articles (SCIP database)
Lunes | 07 diciembre 2020
Decisión en el caso 1944/2020/TE sobre la forma en que la Comisión Europea y la Agencia Europea de Sustancias y Mezclas Químicas establecen la base de datos de la UE sobre información de sustancias preocupantes en los artículos (base de datos SCIP)
Jueves | 03 diciembre 2020
El caso se refería a la creación de una nueva base de datos de la UE con información sobre sustancias preocupantes en los artículos (base de datos SCIP) en virtud de la legislación de la UE en materia de residuos. El reclamante, una asociación europea de comercio, consideró que la información obligatoria que deben facilitar los proveedores de artículos a la Agencia Europea de Sustancias y Mezclas Químicas (ECHA, por sus siglas en inglés) va más allá de lo exigido por la legislación de la UE en materia de sustancias químicas.
La reclamación hace referencia a la interpretación de varias disposiciones de la legislación de la UE en materia de residuos y sustancias químicas. En opinión de la Defensora del Pueblo, la Comisión y la ECHA han adoptado una interpretación razonable de las disposiciones pertinentes. Si bien la interpretación del reclamante es diferente, esto no es suficiente para sugerir que la interpretación de la Comisión y de la ECHA sean erróneas. Corresponde a un órgano jurisdiccional determinar la interpretación correcta en caso de disputa. Por tanto, la Defensora del Pueblo no detectó una mala administración y archivó el caso.
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
Martes | 13 octubre 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
Jueves | 08 octubre 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
Martes | 25 agosto 2020
Supuesta exclusión ilícita del procedimiento de contratación pública de servicios de traducción iniciado por la Comisión Europea
Martes | 30 junio 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
Viernes | 08 mayo 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
Jueves | 30 abril 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
Miércoles | 29 abril 2020
Equidad de la decisión de la Comisión de recuperar los fondos de la UE en el contexto de un proyecto financiado por la UE destinado a ayudar a grupos sociales vulnerables en Uzbekistán
Viernes | 13 marzo 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
Martes | 03 marzo 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
Miércoles | 19 febrero 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
Martes | 10 diciembre 2019
Decision in case 306/2018/JAP concerning how the European Commission dealt with an audit of three EU-funded projects
Martes | 26 noviembre 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.
Procedimiento seguido por la Comisión Europea para tramitar una reclamación relativa a información errónea sobre el plazo concedido a los solicitantes de períodos de prácticas para adjuntar electrónicamente los documentos justificativos
Jueves | 21 noviembre 2019
La presunta omisión, por parte de la Oficina de Publicaciones de la UE, de la obligación de proporcionar razones válidas para su decisión de no publicar un anuncio de licitación en el Diario Oficial de la Unión Europea
Lunes | 07 octubre 2019
Decision in case 502/2019/KT on the European Commission’s refusal to reimburse the hotel costs of a freelance interpreter
Jueves | 19 septiembre 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
Jueves | 22 agosto 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
Lunes | 05 agosto 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
Jueves | 01 agosto 2019