Order — ECLI:EU:F:2016:147
Date: 2016-07-13
Language of the case: French
Based on: Merger Treaty (1965)
Subject matter: Staff regulations and employment conditions - EC
Procedure: Staff cases - inadmissible;Action for damages - inadmissible

Summary 1. Actions brought by officials — Act adversely affecting an official — Concept — Absence of a definitive reply to a request — Implied rejection (Staff Regulations, Arts 90 and 91) 2. Actions brought by officials — Prior administrative complaint — Implied rejection of a request not challenged within the prescribed time limit — Subsequent express decision — Confirmatory measure (Staff Regulations, Arts 90 and 91) 1. A letter by which the person concerned is informed that his request is under consideration, and thus registered, does not entail acceptance of the request at issue, even if the letter in question indicates that the request will probably be accepted. In such circumstances, if no definitive reply to the request has been received in the period prescribed by Article 90(1) of the Staff Regulations, this is deemed to constitute an implied decision rejecting it, against which a complaint may be lodged in accordance with Article 90(2) thereof. (see para. 34) See: Judgment of 3 July 2012 in Marcuccio v Commission, T‑594/10 P, EU:T:2012:336, para. 21 2. The express rejection of a request after an implied decision rejecting that same request is a purely confirmatory measure that cannot enable the official concerned to continue the pre-litigation procedure by opening for him a new period for lodging a complaint. (see para. 38) See: Order of 5 December 2012 in Scheidemann v Parliament, F‑109/12, EU:F:2012:176, para. 18