Opinion of Mr advocate general

Mr President, Members of the Court,

1. This Court is asked to give judgment once more on a case concerning the conditions for admission to an open competition based on tests. The applicant, Mr Szemerey, an official of the Commission of British nationality, who had applied to take pan in Competition COM/A/154 published in September 1977 for the constitution of a reserve of administrators in Category A, Grades 7 and 6 (Official Journal C 213 of 7 September 1977), was not admitted to the written tests since the selection board considered that his qualifications were inadequate because they did not meet the necessary requirements. The excluded applicant then lodged a complaint against that decision within the meaning of Article 90 of the Staff Regulations of Officials; however, the Commission, by letter of 17 April 1978, rejected the complaint, stating that the contested decision was completely in accordance with the provisions of the Staff Regulations.

2. I shall first of all examine the submissions concerning the alleged unlawfulness of the notice of competition. The applicant complains that the conditions of the possession of a university degree and that of at least one year's practical experience in the field chosen by the applicant have been laid down jointly. In his opinion the combined stipulation of the two requirements is contrary to the provision laid down in the second subparagraph of Article 5 (1) of the Staff Regulations of Officials which provides for university education and equivalent professional experience in the alternative as the necessary requirements for admission to the career brackets in Category A.

3. Another complaint is based upon Article 27 of the Staff Regulations of Officials. The first paragraph of that provision provides that staff must be recruited so as [to secure] for the institution the services of officials of the highest standard of ability, efficiency and integrity, recruited on the broadest geographical basis from among nationals of Member States of the Communities.

4. I shall move on to the criticisms which directly affect the measure by which the selection board excluded the applicant from taking part in the tests. Mr Szemerey maintains that that measure does not contain a sufficiently clear statement of the reasons upon which it is based and is therefore in breach of the second paragraph of Article 25 of the Staff Regulations which provides that all decisions relating to a specific individual adversely affecting officials must state the grounds on which they are based.

5. In the last ground of appeal the applicant complains that the selection board did not take into consideration in the appraisal of his qualifications the national education system in the United Kingdom, the country of which he is a national.

6. For all the foregoing considerations, I take the view that the application must be dismissed: it is clear in fact that both Notice of Competition No COM/A/154 and the decision adopted by the selection board not to admit Mr Szemerey to the tests are not vitiated by illegality as claimed by the applicant. Given the nature of the dispute, each party will have to bear its own costs.

1 Translated from the Italian.