Opinion of Mr Advocate-General Reischl

Mr President,

Members of the Court,

By a notice dated 12 March 1974 posted in the European Parliament it was announced that the post of a Head of Division in Grade A3 in the Directorate-General for Committees and Interparliamentary Delegations was vacant. The applicant was among those who applied for the post. The post was not filled by promotion or transfer and therefore on 18 November 1974 it was announced that an internal competition — A/51 — would take place. The duties involved in the post were set out in detail and the requisite ability and knowledge indicated in the announcement, as had already been done in the notice of vacancy. Whereas however in the first notice of vacancy thorough knowledge of Danish was required, it was simply stated with regard to the competition that for practical purposes a knowledge of Danish is desirable. The applicant also took part in this competition. The Selection Board carried out the requisite examinations and made its report on 18 April 1975. There were nine applicants on the list of suitable candidates: the candidate who headed the list had total marks of 56·5, the second candidate, Mr G., 50·25, while the applicant with 46·25 came sixth. On the basis of this list the President of the Parliament appointed Mr G. to the advertised post on 29 April 1975 with effect from 1 May 1975.

On 18 June 1975 the applicant made a formal complaint to the administration seeking the annulment of the appointment and the appointment of himself as Head of Division under Article 29 (1) (a) in conjunction with Article 45 (1) or under Article 29 (1) (b) of the Staff Regulations. He stated inter alia that as distinct from Mr G. he had already been eligible for promotion at the start of the procedure for filling the vacancy, he had received more marks in the previous competition A/43 (this was the subject of Case 23/74) than had Mr G. and Mr G. had not undergone an examination to test his knowledge of Danish.

This complaint remained unanswered. Therefore on 16 December 1975 the applicant brought the matter before the Court and claimed that the decision of the President of Parliament appointing Mr G. Head of Division should be annulled.

The applicant raised a number of objections in support of his claim. They relate to the correctness of holding an internal competition, the composition of the Selection Board, the criteria of assessment contained in the notice of vacancy, the tests conducted by the Board and the content of the decision of appointment itself.

My views on these claims are as follows:

1 Translated Írom the German.