Order;Information — ECLI:EU:C:2020:994
Date: 2020-12-03
Language of the case: English
Court formation: Sixth Chamber
Based on: Merger Treaty (1965)
Subject matter: Staff regulations and employment conditions - EC
Procedure: Appeal - unfounded;Appeal - inadmissible;Staff cases

Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 3 December 2020 – Barata v Parliament (Case C‑259/20 P) (Appeal – Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Civil service – Officials – Certification procedure – 2016 promotion exercise – Exclusion of the appellant from the final list of officials entitled to take part in the training programme – Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union – Obligation to state reasons – Manifest error of assessment – Equal treatment – Rights of the defence) 1. Appeal – Grounds – Ground s of the judgment under appeal citing erroneously a provision of EU law – Clerical error that may be covered by the rectification procedure – Rejection (Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 164) (see paras 4 [12], 5) 2. Actions brought by officials – Plea based on an infringement of the principle of equal treatment – Reversal of the burden of proof – Conditions (Staff Regulations, Art. 1d(5)) (see paras 4 [40-42, 77], 5) 3. Actions brought by officials – Prior administrative complaint – Rejection decision – Requirement to hear the interested party before a ruling on a complaint or to give him or her the opportunity to supplement it – None (Staff Regulations of Officials, Art. 90(2)) (see paras 4 [59], 5) Operative part 1. The appeal is dismissed as being in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded. 2. Mr João Miguel Barata shall bear his own costs.