Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2002:22
Date: 2002-01-31
Language of the case: French
Court formation: Fourth Chamber
Based on: Merger Treaty (1965)
Subject matter: Staff regulations and employment conditions - EC
Concepts: Legal certainty;Grading;General
Procedure: Staff cases - successful

SUMMARY - CASE T-206/00 
Summary 
1. Officials - Decision adversely affecting an official - Obligation to state grounds 
- Scope 
(Staff Regulations, Art. 25, second para.) 
2. Community law - Principles - Legal certainty - Meaning 
3. Officials - Recruitment - Step classification - Additional seniority in grade -
Taking into consideration of professional experience — Rules laid down by the 
Commission - Taking into account of professional experience gained subsequent to 
the qualification giving access to the competition - Refusal on the basis of a 
condition attaching to the qualification but not mentioned in the notice of 
competition - Not permissible 
(Staff Regulations, Art. 32, second para.) 
1. The obligation to state grounds, laid down by the second paragraph of Article 25 
of the Staff Regulations, is intended, on the one hand, to provide the person 
concerned with sufficient information to determine whether the decision taken by 
the administration was well founded and whether it is appropriate to bring 
proceedings before the Court and, on the other, to enable the Court to carry out its 
review. The extent of the obligation must be considered in the light of the specific 
circumstances of the case, in particular the content of the measure, the nature of the 
grounds relied upon and the interest which the addressee may have in receiving an 
explanation. In order to assess whether a statement of grounds is sufficient, it must 
therefore be viewed in the original context in which the contested act was adopted. 
(see paras 27-28) 
See: T-283/97 Thinus v Commission [1999] ECR-SCI-A-69 and II-353, paras 73 and 77, 
and the case-law cited; T-10/99 Vicente Nunez v Commission [2000] ECR-SC I-A-47 and 
II-203, para. 41 
I-A - 20 
HULT v COMMISSION 
2. The principle of legal certainty aims to ensure that situations and legal 
relationships governed by Community law remain foreseeable. To that end, it is 
essential that the Community institutions observe the principle that they may not 
alter measures which they have adopted and which affect the legal and factual 
situation of persons, so that they may amend those acts only in accordance with the 
rules on competence and procedure. 
(see para. 38) 
See: T-229/94 Deutsche Bahn v Commission [1997] ECR II-1689, para. 113, and the 
case-law cited 
3. Under Article 32 of the Staff Regulations and Articles 2 and 3 of the Commission 
Decision of 1 September 1983 on the criteria applicable to grade and step 
classification upon recruitment, it is the qualification required by the notice of 
competition which determines not only whether a candidate is admitted to the 
competition by the selection board, but also the additional seniority in grade allowed 
on recruitment by the appointing authority on the basis of the professional 
experience gained by the person concerned after obtaining that qualification. The 
appointing authority cannot therefore refuse that additional seniority on the ground 
that the official's qualification does not satisfy a requirement which is not mentioned 
in the notice of competition. 
(see paras 48-49) 
See: T-2/90 Ferreira de Freitas v Commission [1991] ECR II-103, para. 57 
I-A - 21