Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . OFFICIALS - STAFF REGULATIONS - GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR GIVING EFFECT THERETO - DUTY TO ADOPT SUCH PROVISIONS - EXCEPTIONAL NATURE

( EEC-EAEC STAFF REGULATIONS, ARTICLE 110 )

2 . OFFICIALS - INTEGRATION - POWERS OF THE ADMINISTRATION - SAFEGUARDS FOR CANDIDATES - NO ANALOGY WITH SAFEGUARDS PROVIDED FOR UNDER THE STAFF REGULATIONS IN RELATION TO DISCIPLINARY MEASURES AND DISMISSAL FOR INCOMPETENCE

( EEC-EAEC STAFF REGULATIONS, ARTICLE 102 )

3 . OFFICIALS - INTEGRATION - INTEGRATION PROCEDURE - UNFAVOURABLE ASSESSMENTS MADE BY CANDIDATES' SUPERIORS - DUTY OF THE ESTABLISHMENT BOARD TO INFORM CANDIDATES - FULL ORAL INTIMATION SUFFICIENT

( EEC-EAEC STAFF REGULATIONS, ARTICLE 102 )

4 . OFFICIALS - INTEGRATION - INTEGRATION PROCEDURE - CONFRONTATION OF THE SERVANT CONCERNED WITH HIS IMMEDIATE SUPERIORS NOT ESSENTIAL AS A GENERAL RULE - DUTY TO HAVE SUCH A CONFRONTATION TO CLARIFY ESSENTIAL FACTS IN DISPUTE

( EEC-EAEC STAFF REGULATIONS, ARTICLE 102 )

5 . OFFICIALS - INTEGRATION - OPINION OF THE ESTABLISHMENT BOARD - IMMEDIATE COMMUNICATION TO THE PERSON CONCERNED UNNECESSARY

( EEC-EAEC STAFF REGULATIONS, ARTICLE 102 )

6 . OFFICIALS - INTEGRATION - INTEGRATION PROCEDURE - DUTY OF THE ADMINISTRATION TO INVESTIGATE ALL SOURCES OF INFORMATION FAVOURABLE TO THE PERSON CONCERNED

( EEC-EAEC STAFF REGULATIONS, ARTICLE 102 )

7 . OFFICIALS - INTEGRATION - OPINION OF THE ESTABLISHMENT BOARD - ADDITIONAL PROPOSAL BY THE ESTABLISHMENT BOARD NOT BINDING ON THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY - COMMUNICATION TO THE PERSON CONCERNED NOT OBLIGATORY

( EEC-EAEC STAFF REGULATIONS, ARTICLE 102 )

8 . OFFICIALS - INTEGRATION - OPINION OF THE ESTABLISHMENT BOARD - REVIEW BY THE COURT - LIMITS

9 . OFFICIALS - INTEGRATION - APPEAL AGAINST THE ADMINISTRATION - ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENT - REOPENING OF THE INTEGRATION PROCEDURE

( EEC-EAEC STAFF REGULATIONS, ARTICLE 91 )

Summary

1 . THE EXPRESSION ' THE GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR GIVING EFFECT TO THESE STAFF REGULATIONS ' APPEARING IN ARTICLE 110 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS OF THE EEC AND EAEC REFERS IN THE FIRST INSTANCE TO THE IMPLEMENTING MEASURES EXPRESSLY PROVIDED FOR BY CERTAIN SPECIAL PROVISIONS OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS .

IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EXPRESS PROVISION, THE OBLIGATION TO ADOPT IMPLEMENTING MEASURES SUBJECT TO THE FORMAL REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE 110 CAN BE RECOGNIZED ONLY IN EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES, THAT IS, WHEN THE PROVISIONS OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS ARE SO UNCLEAR AND IMPRECISE THAT ANY APPLICATION OF THEM MUST BE ARBITRARY .

CF . PARAGRAPH 2, SUMMARY, JUDGMENT IN JOINED CASES 19 AND 65/63 .

2 . IN CASES INVOLVING THE INTEGRATION PROCEDURE, THE INSTITUTIONS POSSESS A CERTAIN FREEDOM OF ACTION WHICH, WHILE LIMITED BY THE OBLIGATION TO ENSURE THAT THE PERSON CONCERNED HAS A FAIR CHANCE TO DEFEND HIMSELF, EXCLUDES SAFEGUARDS SIMILAR TO THOSE LAID DOWN BY THE STAFF REGULATIONS IN RELATION TO DISCIPLINARY MEASURES AND DISMISSAL FOR INCOMPETENCE .

CF . PARAGRAPH 9, SUMMARY, JUDGMENT IN CASE 26/63, ( 1964 ) ECR 674 .

3 . THE ESTABLISHMENT BOARD IS NOT BOUND TO INFORM SERVANTS IN WRITING OF ANY UNFAVOURABLE ASSESSMENTS MADE BY THEIR SUPERIORS, A FULL ORAL INTIMATION BEING SUFFICIENT TO ENABLE THEM TO DEFEND THEMSELVES .

4 . IN INTEGRATION CASES THE ESTABLISHMENT BOARD IS OBLIGED TO ARRANGE FOR A CONFRONTATION BETWEEN A SUBORDINATE AND HIS SUPERIOR ONLY IF THE ABSENCE OF SUCH A MEETING WOULD MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE BOARD TO CLARIFY ESSENTIAL FACTS IN DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PARTIES TO AN EXTENT SUFFICIENT IN LAW .

CF . PARAGRAPH 4, SUMMARY, JUDGMENT IN JOINED CASES 19 AND 65/63 .

5 . THERE IS NO PROVISION REQUIRING THE IMMEDIATE COMMUNICATION TO THE PERSON CONCERNED OF THE OPINION OF THE ESTABLISHMENT BOARD, WHICH IS ADDRESSED SOLELY TO THE INSTITUTION .

CF . PARAGRAPH 3, SUMMARY, JUDGMENT IN CASE 84/63, ( 1964 ) ECR 637 .

6 . CF . PARAGRAPH 1, SUMMARY, JUDGMENT IN CASE 68/63 . ( 1965 ) ECR 581 .

IN CASES OF INTEGRATION UNDER THE STAFF REGULATIONS, THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY AND THE ESTABLISHMENT BOARD ARE OBLIGED TO INVESTIGATE ALL THE RELIABLE INFORMATION FAVOURABLE TO THE PERSON CONCERNED .

*/ 663J0068 /*.

7 . A PROPOSAL BY THE ESTABLISHMENT BOARD MADE OUTSIDE THE CONTEXT OF ARTICLE 102 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS IS NO MORE THAN A SUGGESTION WITHOUT ANY BINDING LEGAL CONSEQUENCES . THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY IS THEREFORE NEITHER OBLIGED TO COMMUNICATE THIS SUGGESTION TO THE PERSON CONCERNED NOR TO INFORM HIM WHY IT WAS NOT ACCEPTED .

8 . CF . PARAGRAPH 5, SUMMARY, JUDGMENT IN JOINED CASES 19 AND 65/63 .

THE ASSESSMENTS OF THE ESTABLISHMENT BOARD CONSTITUTE A GENERAL VALUE-JUDGMENT, FOR WHICH THE COURT CANNOT SUBSTITUTE ITS OWN ASSESSMENT . ON THE OTHER HAND IT IS FOR THE COURT TO CHECK WHETHER THE FACTS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT BY THE ESTABLISHMENT BOARD ARE MATERIALLY ACCURATE AND LOGICALLY COMPATIBLE WITH THAT JUDGMENT .

*/ 663J0019 /*.

9 . CF . PARAGRAPH 5, SUMMARY, JUDGMENT IN CASE 26/63, ( 1964 ) ECR 341 .

ALTHOUGH THE COURT, EVEN IN THE CONTEXT OF PROCEEDINGS IN WHICH IT HAS UNLIMITED JURISDICTION, AS IT HAS UNDER ARTICLE 91 ( 1 ) OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS, IS UNABLE TO ORDER THE ADMINISTRATION TO CARRY OUT A SPECIFIC ACT, THE REOPENING OF THE INTEGRATION PROCEDURE MUST HOWEVER BE CONSIDERED MERELY AS ONE OF THE CONSEQUENCES FLOWING FROM THE EXECUTION OF THE JUDGMENT IF THE APPEAL WERE TO BE UPHELD .

*/ 663J0026 /*.