Order — ECLI:EU:T:2000:269
Date: 2000-11-17
Based on: Merger Treaty (1965)
Subject matter: Staff regulations and employment conditions - EC
Concepts: Reports;Time-limits
Procedure: Staff cases - inadmissible

SUMMARY - CASE T-200/99 
Summary 
1. Officials - Actions - Prior administrative complaint - Implied decision 
rejecting a request not challenged within the time-limits - Subsequent express 
decision - Confirmatory act - Time-barred 
(Staff Regulations, Arts 90 and 91) 
2. Officials - Reports procedure - Staff report - Drawing up - Delay -
Service-related fault giving rise to non-material damage - Conditions - Official 
already retired at the time he became aware of the absence of a report -
No damage 
(Staff Regulations, Art. 43) 
1. The last indent of Article 91(3) of the Staff Regulations, which reads 'where a 
complaint is rejected by express decision after being rejected by implied decision 
but before the period for lodging an appeal has expired, the period for lodging the 
appeal shall start to run afresh', cannot apply at the stage of the request and before 
the complaint is lodged. That specific provision, which relates to the rules for 
calculating periods for filing appeals, must be interpreted literally and strictly. It 
follows that the express rejection of a request after an implied decision rejecting that 
same request cannot enable the official concerned to continue the pre-litigation 
procedure by opening for him a new period for lodging a complaint, as that decision 
is in the nature of a purely confirmatory measure. 
(see para. 11) 
See: 75/82 and 117/82 Razzouk and Beydounv Commission [1984] ECR 1509, para. 12; 
T-38/91 Coussios v Commission [1991] ECR II-763; T-129/89 Offermann v Parliament 
[1991] ECR II-855, para. 32; T-15/91 Bollendoiffv Parliament [1992] ECR II-1679, 
paras 26, 27 and 32; T-55/92 Knijff v Court of Auditors [1993] ECR II-823, para. 34 
I-A - 254 
MARTINELLI v COMMISSION 
2. The absence of a staff report from the personal file of an official is capable of 
giving rise, in so far as that official is concerned, to non-material damage if his 
career could have been affected thereby or if that fact resulted in his being put in 
an uncertain state of mind with regard to his future. An official who became aware 
of the absence of his staff report from his personal file only after his retirement 
cannot claim to be in an uncertain or anxious state of mind with regard to his 
professional future. 
(see paras 16-18) 
See: T-496/93 Allo v Commission [1995] ECR-SC I-A-127 and II-405, para. 89 
I-A - 255