Order — ECLI:EU:F:2011:26
Date: 2011-03-17
Language of the case: French
Court formation: Second Chamber
Based on: Merger Treaty (1965)
Subject matter: Staff regulations and employment conditions - EC
Procedure: Staff cases - inadmissible;Action for damages - inadmissible

Summary Officials — Actions — Prior administrative complaint — Time-limits — Mandatory (Staff Regulations, Arts 90 and 91; Rules of Procedure of the Civil Service Tribunal, Art. 100(3)) The periods for lodging complaints and bringing actions referred to in Articles 90 and 91 of the Staff Regulations are matters of public policy and cannot be left to the discretion of the parties or the Court, which must ascertain, of its own motion if need be, whether they have been complied with. It is for the parties to exercise due care and attention in order to comply with the time-limits laid down by the applicable rules. Consequently, while the applicant is entitled to use the whole period for bringing an action provided for in Article 100(3) of the Rules of Procedure of the Civil Service Tribunal, that option runs the risk, however, that his action will be ruled inadmissible if the original of the application is lodged with the Tribunal after the time allotted, for reasons which have nothing to do with unforeseeable circumstances or force majeure. (see paras 5, 9) See: 29 June 2000, C‑154/99 P Politi v European Training Foundation, para. 15; 8 November 2007, C‑242/07 P Belgium v Commission, para. 17 15 January 2009, T‑306/08 P Braun-Neumann v Parliament, para. 36; 12 October 2009, T‑283/09 P Aayhan and Others v Parliament, para. 19 12 May 2010, F‑13/09 Peláez Jimeno v Parliament, para. 18