Dear X,
On 16 September 1997 you made a complaint to the European Ombudsman concerning the refusal by the European Parliament to admit you to a competition. On 29 September 1997 I forwarded the complaint to the President of the European Parliament. On 24 November 1997 the Parliament sent its opinion. I forwarded the Parliament's opinion to you with an invitation to make observations, if you so wished. On 3 February 1998 I received your observations.
I am now writing to let you know the results of the inquiries that have been made.
I apologise for the length of time it has taken to deal with your complaint.

THE COMPLAINT

The background to the complaint is in brief the following : In 1996, the European Parliament organised an open competition for French language typists. The notice of competition stipulated a maximum age limit of 36 years, which exceptionally could be raised on a number of grounds. The complainant applied under this competition. As the complainant exceeded the age limit, the complainant asked for the age limit to be raised on the grounds of a physical handicap and of taking care of children. The Selection Board found that the age limit could not be raised -a decision that the complainant contested. The Selection Board maintained the decision on the grounds that the evidence submitted by the complainant did not show that the complainant suffered from a permanent handicap.
Against this background, the complainant lodged the complaint with the Ombudsman. The complainant put forward in substance that the Selection Board's interpretation of the provisions of the notice of the competition concerning the age limit was wrong.

THE INQUIRY

The Parliament's opinion
In its opinion, the Parliament maintained the Selection Board's decision. In support of its stand, the Parliament indicated that a handicap is a permanent state and that the declaration submitted by the applicant concerned a temporary incapacity to work. Moreover, the Parliament indicated that the complainant had submitted conflicting evidence. As concerns the possibility to raise the age limit on the grounds that the complainant had stopped working in order to take care of children, the Parliament indicated that the declaration to this effect only covered a period of 2 years, 7 months and 10 days, while the complainant exceeded the age limit by 2 years, 11 months and 10 days.
The complainant's observations
In observations, the complainant maintained the complaint.

THE DECISION

1 Raising the age limit because of a handicap
1.1 The question to be solved is whether the provision concerning the raising of the age limit in case of a handicap shall be interpreted so as to cover temporary incapacity to work. The provision, which is a standard clause in the institutions' notices of competition, reads as follows:

"Candidates who have a physical handicap will have the age limit raised by three years. Requests to have the age limit raised will not be considered unless they are accompanied by a certificate from the competent authority attesting to the candidate's status as a handicapped person."

1.2 The Ombudsman considers that there is in principle no obstacle to interpret this provision favourably for applicants so that it also covers temporary incapacity to work. However, taking also into account other language versions of this standard provision, it seems that it points to a permanent state and not a temporary one. In favour of such a more restrictive interpretation it has also to be mentioned that the provision provides for raising the age limit by a fixed period. If the provision applied to temporary handicaps, it would seem more reasonable to raise the age limit by the period of duration of the handicap. Therefore, it does not appear that the Selection Board acted outside the limits of its authority in deciding that the provision only applies to permanent handicaps.
2 Conclusion
On the basis of the European Ombudsman's inquiries into this complaint, there appears to have been no maladministration by the European Parliament. The Ombudsman has therefore decided to close the case.

FURTHER REMARKS

In 1997 and 1998 the Ombudsman conducted an own initiative inquiry into the age limits applied by the Community institutions in their recruitment policy. The inquiry is reported in the European Ombudsman's Annual Report for 1998, under chapter 3.7.1. Following the Ombudsman's inquiry, a policy decision has been taken to abandon age limits and pending the implementation of this policy decision, the European Parliament, amongst others, has raised its general age limit to 45 years.
The President of the European Parliament will also be informed of this decision.
Yours sincerely,
Jacob SÖDERMAN