Tem uma queixa contra uma instituição ou organismo da UE?

Procurar inquéritos

Caso
Extensão de datas
Palavras-chave
Ou experimentar palavras-chave antigas (antes de 2016)

A apresentar 1 - 20 de 721 resultados

Decision on whether a requirement in a call for tenders for architectural services organised by the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Eurofound) was unnecessarily restrictive (Complaint 521/2021/LM)

Quarta-Feira | 22 junho 2022

A call for tenders for the procurement of architectural services, organised by the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Eurofound), included the requirement that one member of the team that would provide the service be an architect registered with a specific association in Ireland. The complainant, an Irish architectural firm, contended that such a requirement is discriminatory, as other categories of professionals, such as registered building surveyors or chartered engineers, could provide the services listed in the call for tenders.

The Ombudsman found that Eurofound had not clearly demonstrated why the requirement was justified. However, she closed the inquiry with the finding that no further inquiries were justified because Eurofound has not awarded any contract. She nonetheless made a suggestion for improvement for any future calls for tenders for the provision of architectural services that Eurofound may organise.

Decision on how the European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) assessed the professional experience of a candidate in a selection procedure for EU staff in the field of international cooperation (case 270/2021/KT)

Segunda-Feira | 20 junho 2022

The case concerned how the European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) assessed the complainant’s professional experience in a selection procedure for recruiting EU staff in the field of international cooperation.

The Ombudsman found nothing to suggest a manifest error in how the selection board assessed the complainant’s qualifications and, therefore, closed the inquiry with a finding of no maladministration.

Decision on how the European Commission (PMO) divided benefits derived from child allowances between two divorced EU staff members (case 1528/2021/FA)

Quinta-Feira | 02 junho 2022

The case concerned the decision by the European Commission’s Paymaster Office (PMO) to divide benefits derived from the child allowance between two divorced EU staff members. The complainant claimed that she should receive all derived benefits because she bears the majority of the costs for raising the child.

The Ombudsman finds the approach adopted by the PMO to decide on the division of derived benefits reasonable and in line with EU case-law. However, the Ombudsman finds that the PMO gave incoherent explanations to the complainant in its reply to her administrative complaint on the matter. However, with new internal administrative rules having been adopted that cover this area, the Ombudsman trusts that the PMO will ensure consistency in how the rules are applied and clarity in the information it gives to EU staff members. 

The Ombudsman considered that no further inquiries were justified in this case and closed the inquiry.

Decisão sobre a forma como o Banco Europeu de Investimento (BEI) teve em conta o impacto ambiental do Gasoduto Trans-Adriático e do Gasoduto Trans-Anatoliano antes de financiar os projetos (processo 2030/2020/NH)

Quarta-Feira | 27 abril 2022

O caso dizia respeito a dois projetos de gasodutos financiados pelo Banco Europeu de Investimento (BEI) em 2018. Os queixosos alegaram que o BEI não tinha conseguido assegurar que o impacto dos projetos no ambiente tivesse sido avaliado de forma adequada.

Embora chamando a atenção para a revisão limitada que ela pode efetuar em casos como este, a Provedora de Justiça Europeia abriu um inquérito e solicitou ao BEI que fornecesse documentos adicionais relativos às alegações dos queixosos. O BEI foi também convidado a explicar as principais mudanças na forma como garante o respeito pelos critérios ambientais nos projetos que financia na sequência do seu compromisso de deixar de financiar projetos de energia de combustíveis fósseis a partir do final de 2021.

O BEI forneceu explicações adequadas através de resposta. A Provedora de Justiça Europeia considerou que o BEI tinha tomado medidas adequadas como parte do seu «processo de diligência devida» a fim de assegurar que o impacto dos dois oleodutos no ambiente tinha sido devidamente avaliado. A Provedora de Justiça Europeia encerrou o inquérito, concluindo que não existiu má administração por parte do BEI.