Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:2001:180
Date: 2001-03-22
Language of the case: French
Based on: Merger Treaty (1965)
Subject matter: Staff regulations and employment conditions - EC
Procedure: Appeal - unfounded;Staff cases

Summary of the Judgment 
1. Officials — Disciplinary measures — Procedure before the Disciplinary Board — 
Time-limits fixed by Article 7 of Annex IX — Failure to observe time-limits — Time-
limits not mandatory 
(Staff Regulations, Annex IX, Art. 7) 
2. Appeals — Grounds — Incorrect appraisal of the facts — Inadmissible — Dismis­
sal — Legal characterisation of the facts — Admissible 
(Art. 225 EC; EC Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 51, first para.) 
I - 9197 
SUMMARY — CASE C-270/99 P 
3. Officials — Disciplinary measures — Procedure before the Disciplinary Board — 
Time-limits fixed by Article 7 of Annex IX — Considerably exceeded — Breach of 
general principles of Community law — Conditions 
(Staff Regulations, Annex IX, Art. 7) 
1. The time-limits laid down in Article 7 
of Annex IX to the Staff Regulations 
are not mandatory but constitute rules 
of sound administration, with the 
result that a failure to observe those 
time-limits may render the institution 
liable for any damage caused to those 
concerned, but cannot of itself affect 
the validity of a disciplinary sanction 
imposed after their expiry. 
(see para. 21) 
2. An appeal may be based only on 
grounds relating to the infringement 
of rules of law, to the exclusion of any 
appraisal of the facts. The Court of 
First Instance has exclusive jurisdic­
tion, first, to establish the facts except 
where the substantive inaccuracy of its 
findings is apparent from the docu­
ments submitted to it and, second, to 
assess those facts. When the Court of 
First Instance has established or 
assessed the facts, the Court of Justice 
has jurisdiction under Article 225 EC 
to review the legal characterisation of 
those facts by the Court of First 
Instance and the inferences in law it 
has drawn from them. 
(see para. 37) 
3. It cannot be precluded that the fact that 
the time-limits laid down in Article 7 
of Annex IX to the Staff Regulations 
are exceeded to a considerable extent 
may in certain cases amount to an 
infringement of a general principle of 
Community law applicable to such 
proceedings. More specifically, such a 
situation may prevent the person con­
cerned from defending his interests 
effectively or cause him to have a 
legitimate expectation that no disci­
plinary measure will be imposed. 
In such exceptional circumstances, a 
delay in adopting a disciplinary deci­
sion would constitute a breach of the 
rights of defence or of the principle of 
the protection of legitimate expecta­
tions, which would justify the decision 
being declared void by the Community 
judicature. 
(see paras 43-44) 
I - 9198