70The defendant submits that, even if the Court should conclude that the alleged obligation to hear the applicant before adopting the contested decision was notobserved in the present case, that irregularity constitutes an infringement of the principle of respect for the rights of defence only if it might have had a particular effect on the contested decision (Case T-36/96 Gaspari v Parliament [1997] ECRSC I-A-201 and II-595, paragraph 34, and B v Parliament, cited in paragraph 37 above, paragraph 40). Clearly, a preliminary consultation of the applicant could have had no such effect, since in the present case the appointing authority had no choice other than to adopt the contested decision.
Source: EUR-Lex, © European Union, 1998-2026. Reuse authorised under Decision 2011/833/EU.