Judgment — ECLI:EU:F:2015:149
Date: 2015-12-15
Language of the case: French
Court formation: Third Chamber
Based on: Merger Treaty (1965)
Subject matter: Staff regulations and employment conditions - EC
Procedure: Action for damages - unfounded;Staff cases

Summary 1. Actions brought by officials — Actions for compensation — Application for annulment of a pre-litigation decision rejecting a request for compensation — Application not independent of the claims for compensation (Staff Regulations, Arts 90 and 91) 2. Officials — Non-contractual liability of the institutions — Damage — Assessment — Criteria (Staff Regulations, Art. 90(1)) 1. An institution’s decision rejecting a request for compensation forms an integral part of the preliminary administrative procedure which precedes an action to establish liability before the Civil Service Tribunal and, consequently, claims for annulment of such a decision cannot be assessed in isolation from the claims for compensation. The measure setting out the position adopted by an institution’s administration during the pre-litigation stage only has the effect of allowing the party who has suffered harm to apply to the Civil Service Tribunal for damages. (see para. 26) See: Judgments of 28 April 2009 in Verheyden v Commission, F‑72/06, EU:F:2009:40, para. 30, and 18 September 2014 in Radelet v Commission, F‑7/13, EU:F:2014:217, para. 57 2. In the context of compensation for harm caused by a series of measures and actions taken by an institution, the measures and actions must be subject to an overall assessment, the legality and effects of which must be viewed in aggregate. In that regard, the fact that, after a request for compensation was made, other facts similar in nature to those complained of in the request for compensation vitiated subsequent decisions of a similar nature to those challenged in that request, and revealed wrongful conduct comparable to that criticised in the request, that is, a breach of the principle of sound administration and the duty to have regard for an official’s welfare, may not be taken into account in the compensation dispute. In order to assess whether the institution may be held liable, the Civil Service Tribunal may take account only of facts relied on in support of the claims for damages in the application and referred to in the request for compensation, the whole point of which is to set a binding framework for the proceedings. (see paras 41, 43, 44) See: Judgment of 1 July 1976 in Sergy v Commission, 58/75, EU:C:1976:102, paras 30-36 Judgment of 1 February 2007 in Tsarnavas v Commission, F‑125/05, EU:F:2007:18, para. 81