(Civil service– Officials– Recruitment– Open Competition EPSO/AST/147/19

1On 24January 2019, the notice of competition EPSO/AST/147/19, based on qualifications and tests, organised for the purpose of drawing up a reserve list from which assistants (AST3) could be recruited in the fields of security operations, technical security and information and document security (‘the competition’) was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (OJ 2019 C30A, p.1; ‘the competition notice’).

2Point5, entitled ‘Assessment centre’, stated as follows under the heading ‘How will I be selected?’:

‘…

Seven general competencies for the AST competition and eight general competencies for the AD competition, as well as the field-related competencies required for each competition, will be tested at the assessment centre.

The tests for EPSO/AD/364/19 and EPSO/AST/147/19 will be comprised of 4 tests (general competency-based interview, field-related interview, group exercise and case study) as described in the following matrices:

…

Pass marks for EPSO/AST/147/19: 3/10 per competency and 35/70 in total

…’

3Point6, entitled ‘Reserve list’, stated, also under the heading ‘How will I be selected?’:

‘After checking candidates’ supporting documents and qualifications (Talent Screener), the selection board will draw up a reserve list for each competition and field– until the number of successful candidates sought is reached– of those eligible candidates who have obtained all pass marks as well as the highest overall marks following the assessment centre.…

…’

4On 26February 2019, the applicant, OP, submitted his application in the field of security operations. In his application, he declared that he had worked at the European Parliament from 1July 2014 to 22February 2019 as an accredited parliamentary assistant and head of office.

5By letter of 23August 2019, the applicant was informed that he had been awarded a score of 40 points in the ‘Talent Screener’ phase of the competition, exceeding the threshold of 32 points, and was therefore invited to the next phase of the competition at the assessment centre.

6By decision of 5February 2020, the selection board of the competition (‘the selection board’) informed the applicant that his name had not been included on the reserve list, since he was not among the candidates who had scored the highest aggregate marks at the assessment centre (‘the decision of 5February 2020’). According to the selection board, the applicant’s aggregate mark, that is, 88 points out of 170, was insufficient for his name to be included on the reserve list, the threshold for which had been set at 102 points.

7On 6April 2020, the reserve list was published on the website of the European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO). Forty-two candidates were included on the reserve list, of whom only 39 agreed to have their names published.

8On 15April 2020, the applicant filed a complaint under Article90(2) of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union (‘the Staff Regulations’), in which he argued that the competition was vitiated by the unequal treatment of the candidates, favouring those who were already working in the institutions or agencies of the European Union.

9On 3September 2020, the appointing authority of the European Commission (‘the appointing authority’) rejected the applicant’s complaint (‘the decision rejecting the complaint’). It found that the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence to give rise to a presumption of breach of the principle of equal treatment of the candidates of the competition and, in any event, the administration had carried out checks and had not found any irregularity in the competition.