Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . OFFICIALS - DISPUTES WITH THE ADMINISTRATION - ADMINISTRATION MADE PARTY TO PROCEEDINGS - APPOINTING AUTHORITY - CAPACITY TO BE A PARTY TO LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

( EEC TREATY, ARTICLE 179, EEC STAFF REGULATIONS, ARTICLES 90 AND 91 )

2 . OFFICIALS - DISPUTES WITH THE ADMINISTRATION - PROCEEDINGS BROUGHT AGAINST THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY

( EEC STAFF REGULATIONS, ARTICLES 90 AND 91 )

3 . OFFICIALS - PROMOTION - CONSIDERATION OF COMPARATIVE MERITS - PERIODICAL REPORTS - IMPLEMENTING MEASURES

( EEC STAFF REGULATIONS, ARTICLES 43, 45 AND 110 ) 4 . OFFICIALS - PROMOTION - PERIOD OF ADAPTATION OF THE REGULATIONS - ABSENCE OF PERIODICAL REPORTS - LEGALITY OF PROMOTIONS

( EEC STAFF REGULATIONS, ARTICLES 43, 45 AND 110 )

5 . OFFICIALS - PROMOTION - POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE ADMINISTRATION

( EEC STAFF REGULATIONS, ARTICLE 45 )

6 . OFFICIALS - PROMOTION - CRITERIA FOR ASSESSMENT - ABSENCE OF PERIODICAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD OF ADAPTATION OF STAFF REGULATIONS - NO OBLIGATION ON THE ADMINISTRATION TO DRAW UP AD HOC REPORTS

( EEC STAFF REGULATIONS, ARTICLE 45 )

7 . OFFICIALS - PROMOTION - ADMINISTRATION'S CRITERIA FOR ASSESSMENT - NO OBLIGATION TO STATE REASONS AS REGARDS UNSUCCESSFUL CANDIDATES

( EEC STAFF REGULATIONS, ARTICLES 25 AND 45 )

8 . OFFICIALS - PROMOTION BASED ON A CONSIDERATION OF SUBJECTIVE APPLICATION FORMS - STRICT CRITERIA FOR ASSESSMENT - OBLIGATION TO STUDY THE PERSONAL FILES OF CANDIDATES

( EEC STAFF REGULATIONS, ARTICLE 45 )

Summary

1 . IT FOLLOWS FROM ARTICLE 179 OF THE EEC TREATY AND FROM ARTICLES 90 AND 91 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS THAT THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY, WHICH EXERCISES IN FACT THE POWERS OF AN EMPLOYER WITH REGARD TO OFFICIALS, HAS THE CAPACITY TO BE A PARTY TO LEGAL PROCEEDINGS IN DISPUTES BETWEEN SERVANTS AND THE ADMINISTRATION .

CF . PARA . 1 OF SUMMARY IN JOINED CASES 79 AND 82/63 .

2 . ANY OFFICIAL MAY SUBMIT A REQUEST OR COMPLAINT THROUGH HIS IMMEDIATE SUPERIOR TO THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY OF HIS INSTITUTION UNDER ARTICLE 90 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS . THE APPEAL TO THE COURT PROVIDED FOR IN ARTICLE 91 MUST, FAILING ANY PROVISION TO THE CONTRARY, FOLLOW THE LIKE RULES AND BE BROUGHT AGAINST THE SAME AUTHORITY .

3 . THE APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 45 REQUIRES NO MEASURE FOR GIVING EFFECT TO IT OTHER THAN THAT LAID DOWN IN ARTICLE 43, TO WHICH ARTICLE 45 REFERS BY IMPLICATION . THE APPLICATION OF THIS PROVISION PRESUPPOSES THAT REPORTS HAVE BEEN MADE ON THE ABILITY, EFFICIENCY AND CONDUCT IN THE SERVICE OF OFFICIALS, THESE REPORTS BEING ONE OF THE FACTORS IN THE CONSIDERATION OF THE COMPARATIVE MERITS OF THE OFFICIALS ELIGIBLE FOR PROMOTION .

4 . THE FACT THAT, DURING THE PERIOD OF ADAPTATION OF THE REGULATIONS, THE COMMISSION DID NOT ADOPT GENERAL PROVISIONS WHICH WOULD HAVE ALLOWED THE REPORTS PROVIDED FOR IN ARTICLE 43 TO BE MADE, CANNOT BE REGARDED AS AN ERROR OF SUCH A NATURE AS TO INVALIDATE A PROMOTION .

5 . THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY HAS WIDE DISCRETIONARY POWERS IN RELATION TO THE PROMOTION OF OFFICIALS . SUCH POWERS DO, HOWEVER, PRESUPPOSE THE EXISTENCE OF THE NECESSARY GUARANTEE AFFORDED BY THE SCRUPULOUS CONSIDERATION OF PERSONAL FILES EACH CONTAINING COMPARABLE INFORMATION . THIS EXAMINATION SHOULD COMPRISE AN EVALUATION OF MERITS ON A BASIS OF EQUALITY AND THE TAKING INTO ACCOUNT OF INFORMATION THE SOURCE AND CONTENT OF WHICH IS COMPARABLE IN EACH INSTANCE .

CF . PARA . 1 OF SUMMARY IN CASE 27/63 .

6 . IT WOULD BE TOO MUCH, HOWEVER, TO REQUIRE THE ADMINISTRATION TO DRAW UP AD HOC REPORTS TO TAKE THE PLACE OF THE REPORTS PROVIDED FOR IN ARTICLE 43 DURING THE ADAPTATION PERIOD WHENEVER A VACANT POST MAKES IT NECESSARY TO COMPARE THE MERITS OF POSSIBLE CANDIDATES .

CF . PARA . 2 OF SUMMARY IN CASE 27/63 .

7 . IN THE CASE OF PROMOTION, THE ADMINISTRATION IS UNDER NO OBLIGATION, UNDER ARTICLE 25 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS, TO STATE THE FACTORS ON WHICH ITS ASSESSMENT WAS BASED IN RESPECT OF UNSUCCESSFUL CANDIDATES .

CF . PARA . 3 OF SUMMARY IN CASE 27/63 .

8 . APPLICATION FORMS SUBMITTED BY THE PERSONS CONCERNED THEMSELVES, WITHOUT ANY VERIFICATION OR CHECK BY THE APPROPRIATE DEPARTMENTS OF THE COMMISSION, ARE DOCUMENTS OF AN ESSENTIALLY SUBJECTIVE NATURE, THE CONTENT AND SCOPE OF WHICH CAN BE EVALUATED ONLY WITH CONSIDERABLE CARE IN A MATTER REQUIRING AS OBJECTIVE A CONSIDERATION AS POSSIBLE OF THE MERITS OF THE CANDIDATES . THE OBSERVANCE OF THIS REQUIREMENT IS ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT IN CASES WHERE THE COMMISSION TAKES ITS DECISION BY WRITTEN PROCEDURE AND THEREFORE WITHOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF ANY DISCUSSION AND IN THE ABSENCE OF REPORTS ON THE ABILITY, EFFICIENCY AND CONDUCT OF CANDIDATES IN THE SERVICE . IN SUCH CASES THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY MUST SUPPLEMENT ITS INFORMATION BY CONSULTING THE PERSONAL FILES OF THE CANDIDATES .