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 273 resultados

Decisão sobre a legitimidade de a Provedora de Justiça inquirir sobre o tratamento dado pelo Tribunal de Justiça da União Europeia a preocupações relativas ao cumprimento do Código de Conduta dos Membros do Tribunal (processo 1072/2021/NH)

Segunda-Feira | 27 junho 2022

O caso dizia respeito a observações públicas formuladas por um advogado-geral do Tribunal de Justiça da União Europeia (TJUE) sobre o projeto de Regulamento Mercados Digitais da UE enquanto o processo legislativo estava em curso. O queixoso, uma organização de defesa dos consumidores, considerou que o TJUE não tratou adequadamente esta potencial violação do seu código de conduta.

A Provedora de Justiça formulou uma série de perguntas ao TJUE. O TJUE argumentou que a Provedora de Justiça não tinha mandato para investigar a queixa, uma vez que esta dizia respeito ao papel judicial do Tribunal.

A opinião da Provedora de Justiça sobre o seu mandato divergiu da opinião do TJUE. No entanto, uma vez que eventuais inquéritos adicionais não seriam significativos, a Provedora de Justiça encerrou o caso.

Decision on how the European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) responded to concerns regarding the composition of an interview panel in a selection procedure for EU staff in the field of taxation (case 1169/2020/KT)

Quinta-Feira | 23 junho 2022

The case concerned how the European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) assessed a candidate in an interview in the context of a procedure for recruiting EU civil servants in the field of taxation. The complainant considered that his low score in the interview was due to the fact that the interview panel did not include any expert in taxation. He was dissatisfied with how EPSO addressed his concerns.

In the course of the inquiry, EPSO provided adequate clarifications about the expertise of the selection board. The Ombudsman found nothing to suggest a manifest error in how EPSO had carried out the interview. The Ombudsman therefore closed the inquiry with a finding of no maladministration.

Decision on how the European Commission carried out a procurement procedure for the provision of expert medical services (case 1756/2021/LM)

Quinta-Feira | 02 junho 2022

The European Commission organised a call for tenders for the provision of expert medical services for the European Union’s Joint Sickness Insurance Scheme (‘the JSIS’). The complainant submitted a tender but was not successful.

The complainant asked the Commission for information about the successful tender and the contract value, but the Commission did not provide it to him. The complainant thus turned to the Ombudsman, raising concerns about the procurement procedure and questioning how his replies to the technical questionnaire had been evaluated.

The Ombudsman found that the Commission evaluated the complainant’s offer in line with the applicable rules and, therefore, there was no maladministration in this aspect of the complaint. However, the fact that the Commission provided the complainant with the information he had requested only in the course of the inquiry constituted maladministration. To address this, the Ombudsman made suggestions to ensure that, in the future, the Commission has in place measures to safeguard the rights of unsuccessful tenderers to avail of the redress mechanisms at their disposal.

Decision on how the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust) carried out a selection procedure for the position of legal officer (case 1818/2021/FA)

Sexta-Feira | 20 maio 2022

The case concerned how the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust) carried out a selection procedure for the position of legal officer and assessed the complainant’s application.

The Ombudsman found nothing to suggest a procedural error or a manifest error in how the selection board assessed the complainant’s application and therefore closed the case with a finding of no maladministration.

Decision on how the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) carried out a selection procedure (case 921/2021/VB)

Terça-Feira | 05 abril 2022

The case concerned how the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) organised a remote ‘pre-screening written test’ in a selection procedure. The complainant took issue with the EIOPA’s decision to organise the test remotely and with how the test was organised. He also argued that, as the EIOPA offered two different dates on which candidates could take the test, there was a risk that candidates could share test questions with each other.  

The Ombudsman found that both the decision to organise the pre‑screening test remotely and how the test was organised was reasonable. The EIOPA also took sufficient safeguards to minimise the risk that candidates could share test questions with each other.  

The Ombudsman closed the inquiry finding that there was no maladministration by the EIOPA.