¹ú²úAV

The Applicant failed to indicate a specific date and content of the challenged administrative decision, as she only recalled an email from the Deputy Director, ID/OIOS, which would purportedly confirm an evaluation of insufficiency of the Applicant’s investigatory experience to be recruited for the advertised post. The Tribunal, having considered the above-quoted content of the email, finds it insufficient to substantiate an administrative decision of definitive exclusion of the Applicant from the selection process. It remains, however, that the Applicant was not called for an interview and was not shortlisted for the relevant post. The Tribunal finds that these facts did not give rise to an appealable administrative decision under art. 2.1(a) of its Statute, and that such a step of the selection process may only be challenged in the context of an application against a specific decision with clear and direct legal consequences on the Applicant, such as the final selection decision. There was not a definitive exclusion of the Applicant’s candidacy from the selection process as, at the relevant time, the Administration could still reintroduce her to the selection process at a different moment as, for instance, the review by the Central Review Body was still pending.