Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2001:51
Date: 2001-02-13
Language of the case: French
Court formation: Fifth Chamber
Based on: Merger Treaty (1965)
Subject matter: Staff regulations and employment conditions - EC
Concepts: Inter-institutional transfer;Choice of procedure
Procedure: Staff cases - unfounded
Origin: Denmark

SUMMARY - CASE T-166/00 
Summary 
1. Officials - Recruitment - Procedures - Choice - Discretion of the 
administration - Internal competition procedure of doubtful legality - Annulment 
— Whether permissible 
(Staff Regulations, Art. 29) 
2. Officials - Interinstitutional transfer - Establishment in a higher grade -
Conditions 
(Staff Regulations, Arts 8, third para., and 45) 
1. The appointing authority is not obliged to carry through a recruitment procedure 
initiated pursuant to Article 29 of the Staff Regulations. 
Since the appointing authority has a discretion as to whether or not to proceed with 
a competition, it is, a fortiori, entitled to cancel a competition where there are 
doubts as to the legality of recourse to such a procedure. 
(see paras 25 and 26) 
See: 26/68 Fux v Commission [1969] ECR 145, para. 11; T-38/89 Hochbaum v 
Commission [1990] ECR II-43, para. 15 
2. Under Article 8 of the Staff Regulations, if a decision granting an application for 
transfer by an official involves establishment in a grade higher than that which he 
occupies in his parent institution, such establishment is to count as promotion and 
such a decision may be taken only in accordance with the terms of Article 45 of the 
I-A - 42 
HIRSCHFELDT v EEA 
Staff Regulations. Accordingly, the promotion of an official pursuant to the third 
paragraph of Article 8 of the Staff Regulations is subject to two conditions, namely 
that, first of all, the transfer of the person concerned necessarily involves his 
establishment in a higher grade and, secondly, that the promotion procedure 
complies with the requirements of Article 45 of the Staff Regulations. 
(see para. 42) 
I-A - 43