Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2000:53
Date: 2000-02-24
Language of the case: French
Court formation: Third Chamber
Based on: Merger Treaty (1965)
Subject matter: Staff regulations and employment conditions - EC
Concepts: Assessment of the administration;General
Procedure: Staff cases - successful

SUMMARY - CASE T-82/98 
Summary 
Officials — Promotion — Examination of comparative merits — Official eligible for 
promotion before the end of his first reporting period — Obligation to draw up an 
interim report — Practical impossibility — Information which may be taken into 
consideration in lieu of a report 
(Staff Regulations, Art. 45(1)) 
The periodic report constitutes an indispensable criterion of assessment each time 
the official's career is taken into consideration with a view to a decision concerning 
his promotion. 
It follows that, where an official is eligible for promotion before the expiry of the 
first reference period concerning him, the institution is required either to draw up 
an interim report or, where drawing up such a report would be impossible in 
practice, to provide other information concerning the official's merits to make up 
for the absence of the report. 
However, information can compensate for the absence of a periodic report only 
where it meets certain conditions, and it is for the defendant institution to show that 
those conditions were satisfied. The information must be sufficiently objective to 
allow judicial review, second, it must contain an assessment of the official's merits 
by the persons responsible for drawing up his periodic report, third, it must have 
been communicated to the official in such a way as to ensure his rights of defence 
and, fourth, it must be available to the promotions committee when the latter 
examines the comparative merits of all the candidates. 
(see paras 34, 38 and 41) 
I-A - 40 
JACOBS v COMMISSION 
See: C-68/91 P Moritz v Commission [1992] ECR I-6849, para. 16; T-58/92 Moat v 
Commission [1993] ECR II-1443, para. 59 
I-A - 41