Judgment No. 19253 of 2024: Limits and Possibilities of Judicial Review of Public Competition Examination Boards

Judgment No. 19253 of July 12, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, represents an important ruling on public competitions, particularly regarding the evaluation of examination boards. The Court has established the limits within which the administrative judge can exercise review over technical assessments, avoiding encroachment into the sphere of administrative merit.

Context of the Judgment

In the specific case, the Court examined an appeal against a decision of unsuitability in a competition for the appointment of an ordinary magistrate. The judge emphasized that the boards' assessments are subject to judicial review, but only within certain limits. Specifically, judicial review is admissible in cases of manifest illogicality, evident unreasonableness, or misrepresentation of facts, as expressly stated in the headnote:

(APPEAL FOR) - SPECIAL JURISDICTIONS (CHALLENGEABILITY) - COUNCIL OF STATE Judicial review of technical assessments by public competition examination boards - Admissibility - Limits - Judicial overreach due to encroachment into the sphere of merit - Prerequisites - Manifest illogicality or evident unreasonableness or misrepresentation of facts in relation to the articulation of criteria previously identified by the board - Necessity - Case concerning an examination competition aimed at the appointment of an ordinary magistrate.

The Issue of Judicial Overreach

A crucial point of the judgment is the asserted necessity not to substitute the evaluation criteria established by the board. The Court highlighted that, in the presence of evaluation criteria set by law, the judge can intervene only if the assessments are manifestly illogical or unreasonable, but cannot substitute their own criteria for those of the board. This is fundamental to ensuring that judicial power does not encroach into the sphere of merit, a cornerstone principle of administrative justice.

Conclusions

In conclusion, Judgment No. 19253 of 2024 provides an important clarification regarding the limits of judicial review over the assessments of public competition examination boards. It reiterates that judicial control must remain within well-defined boundaries, avoiding encroachment into the boards' sphere of competence. This balance is essential to preserve the autonomy of competition boards and ensure a fair and just public selection system.