61982CJ0277_EN
Parties
Subject of the case
Grounds
Decision on costs
Operative part
Parties
IN CASE 277/82
CHRYSSANTI PAPAGEORGOPOULOS, FORMERLY A PROBATIONARY OFFICIAL OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE, RESIDING AT 215 E VENIZELOU, ILIOPOULIS, ATHENS, REPRESENTED BY VICTOR BIEL OF THE LUXEMBOURG BAR, 18 A RUE DES GLACIS, AND WITH AN ADDRESS FOR SERVICE AT HIS CHAMBERS,
APPLICANT,
V
ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE, REPRESENTED BY MARIUS SIMOND, ACTING AS AGENT, ASSISTED BY YVETTE HAMILIUS OF THE LUXEMBOURG BAR, 11 BOULEVARD ROYAL, WITH AN ADDRESS FOR SERVICE AT HER CHAMBERS,
DEFENDANT,
Subject of the case
APPLICATION PRINCIPALLY FOR THE ANNULMENT OF THE APPLICANT ' S REPORT AT THE END OF HER PROBATIONARY PERIOD AND OF HER DISMISSAL, AND FOR DAMAGES,
Grounds
1 BY AN APPLICATION LODGED AT THE COURT REGISTRY ON 15 OCTOBER 1982 MRS PAPAGEORGOPOULOS, A PROBATIONARY OFFICIAL OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE, BROUGHT AN ACTION FOR THE ANNULMENT OF THE REPORT AT THE END OF HER PROBATIONARY PERIOD AND OF THE DECISION TO DISMISS HER ADOPTED ON THE BASIS THEREOF, AND ALSO FOR PAYMENT BY THE DEFENDANT OF HER SALARY AND EMOLUMENTS FROM 1 JANUARY 1982 TOGETHER WITH DAMAGES AND INTEREST THEREON IN COMPENSATION FOR NON-MATERIAL INJURY .
2 AS A RESULT OF AN OPEN COMPETITION FOR THE RECRUITMENT OF TYPISTS, THE APPLICANT WAS ENGAGED BY THE DEFENDANT ON 1 JULY 1981 AS A PROBATIONARY OFFICIAL .
3 THE REPORT AT THE END OF THE PROBATIONARY PERIOD WAS DRAWN UP ON 27 NOVEMBER 1981 AND COMMUNICATED TO THE APPLICANT ON 30 NOVEMBER . THE MENTION ' ' INSUFFICIENT ' '
APPEARED UNDER THE HEADING ' ' ABILITY ' '
WITH REGARD TO USE OF SKILLS IN CARRYING OUT DUTIES - ABILITY TO EXPRESS HERSELF IN WRITING, AND FOR VERSATILITY, AND UNDER THE HEADING ' ' EFFICIENCY ' '
FOR QUALITY AND EXECUTION OF WORK . UNDER THE HEADING ' ' GENERAL ASSESSMENT ' '
THE FOLLOWING REASONS WERE GIVEN FOR THE ' ' INSUFFICIENT ' '
RATINGS :
' ' ALTHOUGH MRS PAPAGEORGOPOULOS '
PROFESSIONAL AND TECHNICAL SKILLS MAY BE CONSIDERED TO BE SATISFACTORY, THERE ARE SERIOUS DEFICIENCIES IN HER KNOWLEDGE OF HER MOTHER TONGUE ( GREEK ) AS A RESULT OF WHICH HER WORK IS DEFINITELY INADEQUATE AS REGARDS BOTH QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE .
MOREOVER, THE OBSERVATIONS WHICH WERE PUT TO HER ON THAT SUBJECT REVEALED THAT SHE HAD THE GREATEST DIFFICULTY IN ACCEPTING THE AUTHORITY OF HER SUPERIORS, IN WORKING AS A MEMBER OF A TEAM AND THUS IN ADAPTING HERSELF TO THE WORKING METHODS OF THE INSTITUTION . ' '
4 THE REPORT CONCLUDED WITH A NEGATIVE ASSESSMENT REGARDING THE ABILITY OF THE APPLICANT TO CARRY OUT HER DUTIES, HAVING REGARD TO HER ABILITY, HER EFFICIENCY AND HER CONDUCT IN THE SERVICE .
5 THE REPORT WAS DRAWN UP BY MR VERMEYLEN, HEAD OF DIVISION, AND WAS SIGNED BY MR FARENZENA, HEAD OF THE TYPING POOL, MRS DE OLIVEIRA, ACTING HEAD OF THE POOL, AND MRS PALLIS, HEAD OF THE GREEK POOL .
6 BY A MEMORANDUM OF 4 DECEMBER 1981 THE APPLICANT DISPUTED THE REPORT .
7 BY DECISION OF THE SECRETARY GENERAL OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE OF 21 DECEMBER 1981, NOTIFIED TO THE APPLICANT ON 22 DECEMBER, SHE WAS DISMISSED WITH EFFECT FROM 31 DECEMBER 1981 .
8 ON 18 MARCH 1982 THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A COMPLAINT AGAINST THE DECISION TO DISMISS HER . THE COMPLAINT WAS REJECTED BY DECISION OF THE SECRETARY GENERAL OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE DATED 15 JULY 1982 .
9 IN HER APPLICATION, MRS PAPAGEORGOPOULOS ALLEGES THAT THERE IS AN INADEQUATE STATEMENT OF THE GROUNDS FOR THE REPORT, A LACK OF OBJECTIVITY AND AN IMPLICIT INCONSISTENCY, BREACH OF THE PRINCIPLE OF LEGITIMATE EXPECTATION AND OF THE DUTY TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE, AND FINALLY MISUSE OF POWERS INASMUCH AS MRS PALLIS, WHO SIGNED THE REPORT, DID SO IN ORDER TO RID HERSELF OF A COMPETITOR FOR THE POST OF HEAD OF THE GREEK POOL .
10 IN SUPPORT OF THOSE SUBMISSIONS THE APPLICANT MAINTAINS THAT MRS PALLIS WAS HER COMPETITOR FOR THE POST OF HEAD OF THE GREEK POOL AND THAT CONSEQUENTLY HER ASSESSMENT WAS NOT OBJECTIVE . SHE ALSO MAINTAINS THAT MRS AMARANTIDOU, WHO WAS IN CHARGE OF THE POOL FOR AT LEAST HALF OF THE PROBATIONARY PERIOD, OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN CONSULTED .
11 IT APPEARS FROM THE FILE THAT MRS PALLIS WAS TEMPORARILY PLACED IN CHARGE OF THE GREEK SECTION OF THE TYPING POOL BY DECISION OF 25 SEPTEMBER 1981 WITH EFFECT FROM 1 OCTOBER AND THAT WHEN THE REPORT WAS DRAFTED SHE WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SECTION . IT IS SOUND ADMINISTRATIVE PRACTICE FOR THE
PERSON IN CHARGE OF THE RELEVANT SECTION TO GIVE HER ASSESSMENT OF THE
ABILITY OF A PROBATIONARY OFFICIAL . AS FOR THE APPLICANT ' S COMPLAINT THAT
MRS AMARANTIDOU ' S OPINION HAD NOT BEEN SOUGHT, IT APPEARS THAT THE LATTER, A MEMBER OF THE TEMPORARY STAFF, HAD NEVER BEEN THE SUBJECT OF A WRITTEN DECISION PLACING HER IN CHARGE OF THE GREEK SECTION OF THE TYPING POOL, BUT THAT SHE HAD BEEN ASKED TO COORDINATE THE WORK OF THE GREEK POOL UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF THE HEAD OF THE TYPING POOL . MRS AMARANTIDOU WAS ONLY ABLE TO OBSERVE THE APPLICANT ' S WORK FROM 1 JULY TO 17 AUGUST, AFTER WHICH SHE WENT ON LEAVE . MRS AMARANTIDOU LEFT THE EMPLOYMENT OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE ON 27 AUGUST, EVEN BEFORE THE REPORT WAS DRAWN UP . HER OPINION WAS THEREFORE NOT REQUIRED .
12 THE REPORT WAS COMPILED BY THE HEAD OF DIVISION AND COUNTERSIGNED BY THE HEAD OF THE TYPING POOL, BY MRS DE OLIVEIRA, WHO WAS ACTING HEAD OF POOL DURING THE ABSENCE OF HER SUPERIOR, AND BY THE PERSON IN CHARGE OF THE GREEK POOL, INDICATING THEIR AGREEMENT WITH THE ASSESSMENT CONTAINED IN THE REPORT . THERE IS A SUFFICIENT STATEMENT OF THE GROUNDS FOR THE NEGATIVE ASSESSMENTS IN THE GENERAL ASSESSMENT, TO WHICH REFERENCE IS MADE . THE REPORT WAS, THEREFORE, PROPERLY DRAWN UP AND REASONED .
13 WITH REGARD TO MISUSE OF POWERS THE APPLICANT HAS NOT OFFERED THE SLIGHTEST EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF HER ALLEGATION AND IT MUST THEREFORE BE SET ASIDE .
14 AS TO THE APPLICANT ' S OTHER COMPLAINTS, SHE HAS MERELY SET THEM OUT IN THE APPLICATION WHILST RESERVING THE RIGHT TO ELABORATE UPON THEM IN HER REPLY IF NECESSARY . NO FURTHER CLARIFICATION OR ELABORATION OF THOSE COMPLAINTS WAS PRESENTED DURING THE LATER STAGES OF THE PROCEDURE . IT IS THEREFORE NOT NECESSARY TO EXAMINE THEM .
Decision on costs
COSTS
15 PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 69 ( 2 ) OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE, THE UNSUCCESSFUL PARTY SHALL BE ORDERED TO PAY THE COSTS . HOWEVER, ARTICLE 70 OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE PROVIDES THAT, IN PROCEEDINGS BROUGHT BY OFFICIALS OF THE COMMUNITIES, THE INSTITUTIONS SHALL BEAR THEIR OWN COSTS .
Operative part
ON THOSE GROUNDS,
THE COURT ( FIRST CHAMBER )
HEREBY RULES :
1 . THE APPLICATION IS DISMISSED ;
2 . THE PARTIES SHALL PAY THEIR OWN COSTS .