Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2006:582
Date: 2006-09-14
Language of the case: French
Court formation: Second Chamber
Based on: Merger Treaty (1965)
Subject matter: Staff regulations and employment conditions - EC
Concepts: Administrative complaint;Specific cases of acts having adverse effect;Request
Procedure: Staff cases - inadmissible;Action for damages - inadmissible;Appeal - successful

Summary of the Judgment 1. Officials – Actions – Request under Article 90(1) of the Staff Regulations – Definition (Staff Regulations of Officials, Art. 90(1)) 2. Officials – Actions – Acts adversely affecting an official – Definition (Staff Regulations of Officials, Art. 90(2)) 1. A request for the renewal of a contract of a member of the temporary staff, submitted by the head of the unit in which he is working, is not a request made by that member of the temporary staff within the meaning of Article 90(1) of the Staff Regulations. It is apparent from the clear language of that provision that only persons covered by those Staff Regulations can submit such a request. A note sent by one Commission department to another does not therefore fall within the framework set out by that provision and may not be treated in the same way as a request, otherwise the procedure laid down in that provision might be circumvented. An email from that member of the temporary staff sent to the competent department and requesting certain information about his contract, but which does not request that department to take a decision in his regard, also does not constitute a request within the meaning of Article 90(1) of the Staff Regulations either. (see paras 37-39) 2. An applicant is adversely affected, within the meaning of Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations, only by measures which produce binding legal effects such as to affect his or her interests by bringing about a distinct change in his or her legal position. That is clearly not true of an email from the competent department informing the head of unit of a member of the temporary staff that the contract of that person cannot be renewed and which contains no new factor as compared with the terms of the contract, which is the sole source of legal effects with regard to the persons covered by the Staff Regulations. Such a communication constitutes a purely confirmatory measure and cannot therefore have the effect of setting a fresh time-limit. (see paras 42-46)