Order of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 19 January 2022 –FC v EASO
(Case T‑148/20) (1)
(Action for annulment – Civil service – Members of the temporary staff – Refusal to provide a certificate of good character – Refusal to accept a withdrawal of the resignation – Purely confirmatory act – Time limit for complaints – Irregularity in the pre-litigation procedure – Inadmissibility – Action for damages – Close link with the claim for annulment – Inadmissibility)
1.      Actions brought by officials – Action against a decision rejecting a complaint – Effect – Disputed measure referred to the Court – Exception – Decision not confirmatory in character – Account taken of the reasoning therein
(Staff Regulations of Officials, Arts 90 and 91)
(see paras 32-36)
2.      Actions brought by officials – Prior administrative complaint – Time limits – Mandatory – Time-barred – Reopening – Condition – New and material fact – Concept – Act confirming an earlier decision – Not included
(Art. 270 TFEU; Staff Regulations of Officials, Arts 90 and 91)
(see paras 45-47, 49, 50, 68, 69, 78, 84-86)
3.      Actions brought by officials – Act adversely affecting an official – Concept – Measures producing binding legal effects – Inadequate statement of reasons – Irrelevant
(Staff Regulations of Officials, Arts 25, second para., 90 and 91)
(see paras 48, 66, 77)
4.      Actions brought by officials – No prior administrative complaint – Inadmissibility
(Staff Regulations of Officials, Arts 90 and 91)
(see paras 92-94)
5.      Actions brought by officials – Action for damages brought without a pre-litigation procedure in accordance with the Staff Regulations – Inadmissibility
(Staff Regulations of Officials, Arts 90 and 91)
(see paras 105-107, 112-116)
6.      Actions brought by officials – Application for damages linked to an application for annulment – Dismissal of application for annulment leading to dismissal of the claim for compensation
(Staff Regulations of Officials, Arts 90 and 91)
(see paras 109-111)
Operative part
1.
The action is dismissed as inadmissible.
2.
FC shall pay the costs.
1 OJ C 175, 25.5.2020.