Opinion of Mr Advocate General Capotorti

Mr President,

Members of the Court,

1. Allow me first of all to rehearse the facts of the present case. On 25 June 1979 the European Parliament decided to hold an internal competition on the basis of qualifications and tests for the purpose of filling a vacancy for an administrator (Career Bracket A 7/A 6) in its Information Office in Rome. The relevant notice of competition received the number A/66. At the same time three other notices of competition were published for similar posts in the Information Offices in Paris, Brussels and Dublin. Mrs Anna Guglielmi, a Category Β official of the European Parliament in the Rome office since 1967, took part in Competition No A/66 but did not pass the first written test and was therefore eliminated from subsequent tests.

2. I should say straightaway that the only competition which is being challenged is that in relation to the post of administrator at the Information Office in Rome. That is apparent from the pleadings and was confirmed by the applicant's representative at the hearing.

3. Another contention relied on in the application alleges a breach of the principle of equal treatment. It is said that the subject chosen for the written test favoured candidates from a higher grade who were allowed to participate in the competition and in particular the candidate from the Parliamentary committees. It is apparent that the Staff Regulations do not prevent officials already in a higher grade than that required for the vacancy from participating in competitions. The underlying criterion of the Staff Regulations is to allow all who have the qualifications specified in the notice to participate on the basis of the principle of the interests of the service. Therefore the fact that in the present case one of the candidates admitted to Competition No A/66 was in Grade A 7 when the notice was published and in Grade A 6 at the time of the test could not give rise to any breach of the principle of equality.

4. Finally, Counsel for Mrs Guglielmi maintains that the competition was vitiated for misuse of powers on the ground that the Selection Board chose the subject for the first written test with the intention of favouring the only candidate from Category A, the candidate later declared suitable.

5. For all the reasons stated above my opinion is that the Court should dismiss the action brought by Mrs Anna Guglielmi against the European Parliament by application lodged on 3 December 1980. As for the costs, I think the parties should be ordered to bear their own costs pursuant to Article 70 of the Rules of Procedure.

1 Translated from the Italian.