How selection works
When there are more applicants than funded places, applications are ranked. The ranking is arithmetic, not opinion: each criterion below carries a fixed number of points, the same for every applicant, and the total decides the order. Where places remain, everyone eligible is selected.
The criteria are set on the call itself before it is published, and they are shown here exactly as the Selection Committee scores them. If this page and your decision letter ever disagree, tell us — that is a procedural error and grounds for appeal.
Shown from the published call “Student Studies — BSc/MSc” for 2027/2028. Criteria can differ between calls — the rubric that applies to you is the one on the call you apply to, and it is visible in the Mobility Platform before you submit.
What you receive when a decision is made
A decision on your application is never a bare result. It tells you:
- The outcome, and where you stand if there is a reserve list.
- Your score against each published criterion, so you can check the arithmetic yourself.
- The reasons, where the outcome turned on something other than rank.
- That you may appeal, how, and the date the 7-day window closes.
A deadline you were not told about is not a deadline. If a decision reaches you without these, say so and we will reissue it — and your 7 days run from the corrected decision, not the first one.
Appealing a decision
An appeal asks us to check whether something went wrong in how your application was handled. It is not a second opinion on a correct result — but if you are unsure which you have, appeal anyway and we will look.
Grounds for an appeal
- A quantitative criterion was calculated wrongly — for example your GPA was entered or doubled incorrectly.
- A document you submitted on time was not taken into account.
- A criterion was applied to you but not to others, or applied differently.
- Something in the handling of your own application went wrong — a missed email, a form that did not reach us, a deadline you were given in error.
Not grounds for an appeal
- Disagreement with the criteria themselves. The rubric is published before the call opens and is the same for everyone.
- Disagreement with a score another applicant received. We cannot discuss another student’s application with you.
- A preference for a different partner university, where places were allocated as published.
Appealing costs you nothing and cannot count against you. It has no bearing on this application, on any future application, or on how you are treated by this Office. No one is disadvantaged for asking a fair question.
Where an appeal goes
- 01
The Erasmus Office
Within 7 calendar days of the decision being announcedAlmost every appeal ends here. We investigate in good faith: we re-check the calculation, look again at what you sent and when, and read the file as a whole. If we find a mistake we correct it and re-rank. If we find none, we write to you and show our working, so you can see what was checked and why the result stands.
Written decision within 15–30 days - 02
The Erasmus Selection Committee
If the matter is not one the Office can settle on its ownThe Committee takes the rare cases that need a ruling rather than a correction — a question the published rules do not answer, or a situation that has no precedent. In the ordinary course the Office proposes and the Committee approves; here the Committee decides. Complaints about conduct or treatment also come to the Committee rather than to the Office.
Written decision within 60 days - 03
The Students Ombuds
If you are not satisfied with the University’s answerThe Ombuds is independent of both this Office and your department, established under the CUT (Student Matters and Study Subjects) Regulations of 2015. The Ombuds can investigate, request documents, examine persons and mediate with the competent University bodies. Erasmus students during their mobility at CUT are covered in full.
Independent — the Ombuds sets its own procedureHow to file with the Ombuds →
Write to erasmus@cut.ac.cy with your name, the call, and what you believe went wrong. Attach anything that supports it. You will have an acknowledgement within 3 working days confirming we have it and when to expect an answer — if you do not, assume it did not arrive and write again.
Making a complaint
A complaint is different from an appeal. An appeal concerns a decision; a complaint concerns how you were treated or how long something took.
A payment, a document or an answer that has not come. Goes to the Office, which establishes what happened — including where the delay sits outside this Office, such as with Accounts — and tells you where your case actually stands.
A delay can be raised as soon as the date in your Grant Agreement has passed.
How you were spoken to, or a decision you feel was taken unfairly rather than incorrectly. Goes to the Selection Committee rather than to the Office, so that no one investigates a complaint about themselves.
The Students Ombuds is independent of the University’s services and can investigate on your report or on its own initiative.
We ask the same good faith of ourselves that we ask of you: an accurate account, on both sides, and no one treated worse for having raised something.
What this Office commits to
These are the deadlines we hold ourselves to. Each says what it is counted from, because a deadline without a starting point is not a promise.
After a call closes, your application is ranked and put to the next monthly sitting of the Selection Committee. You are told the outcome after that sitting — you are never left waiting for an unscheduled meeting.
Counted from the day we receive the last document from you that lets the balance payment order be issued under your Grant Agreement. The clock starts on receipt of that final document, not on the end of your mobility — so the sooner your file is complete, the sooner it runs.
The window you have to send us your return documents after your mobility ends. Send them within it and your balance clock starts immediately.
Your Grant Agreement and the documents you need in order to be paid are prepared and sent to you no later than one month before your mobility starts.
If a deadline is missed
Our clocks are ours to keep. Yours are the condition on which they start. The 30 working days for a balance begin when your file is complete — so if your documents reach us two months after your mobility ended, the clock does not begin two months ago. It begins the day we have what we need.
We work through files in the order they become complete. A file that arrives late does not move ahead of one that was ready first. This is not a penalty; it is the only way to be fair to the student who met their deadline, because every hour spent rescuing a late file is an hour taken from someone who did what was asked.
Where the deadlines in your own Grant Agreement have passed, the Office may hold a payment in the queue, or — within what that Agreement allows — decline it. We would far rather not, and it is rare.
If something outside your control is causing the delay, tell us while it is happening. Illness, a host institution that is slow to sign, a document that does not yet exist — these are ordinary, we have seen all of them, and they are taken into account when you raise them at the time. What we cannot do is read silence as a reason after the fact. One line by email is enough to protect your position.
Where this comes from
Under the Erasmus Charter for Higher Education, CUT commits to selection procedures that are fair, transparent, coherent and documented, and to clear complaint procedures for participants and applicants. This page is how that commitment is kept.
Your rights during a mobility are set out in the Erasmus Student Charter. The Students Ombuds operates under the CUT (Student Matters and Study Subjects) Regulations of 2015.
If you believe the University is not honouring its Charter commitments — as distinct from wanting a decision changed — the National Agency for Erasmus+ in Cyprus, the Foundation for the Management of European Lifelong Learning Programmes (IDEP), monitors how institutions meet them. IDEP does not review individual selection decisions; the three steps above are the route for that.