CELEX: 62008FJ0071
Language: en
Date: 2009-11-10 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 10 November 2009. # N v European Parliament. # Public service - Officials - Staff report - Admissibility. # Case F-71/08.

JUDGMENT OF THE CIVIL SERVICE TRIBUNAL
      (First Chamber)
      10 November 2009
      Case F-71/08
      N
      v
      European Parliament
      (Civil service – Officials – Reports procedure – Staff report – Fixing of objectives – Manifest error of assessment – Admissibility – Measure not having adverse effects)
      Application: brought under Articles 236 EC and 152 EA, in which N seeks, in particular, annulment of the decision of the Secretary-General
         of the Parliament of 12 September 2007 adopting his staff report for 2006, and of the decision of the President of the Parliament
         of 22 May 2008 rejecting his complaint against that first decision.
      
      Held: The decision of the Secretary-General of the Parliament of 12 September 2007 adopting the applicant’s definitive staff report
         for the period from 16 August 2006 to 31 December 2006 is annulled. The remainder of the application is dismissed. The Parliament
         is ordered to pay the costs.
      
      Summary
      1.      Officials – Actions – Interest in bringing proceedings – Action for annulment of a staff report – Official reassigned to another
            institution – Report not taken into consideration by that institution
      (Staff Regulations, Art. 43)
      2.      Officials – Reports procedure – Staff report – Obligation to bring to the attention of the official concerned the document
            fixing the objectives assigned to his department
      (Staff Regulations, Art. 43)
      1.      Irrespective of its future usefulness, an official’s staff report constitutes written, formal evidence of the quality of the
         work carried out by the person concerned. Such an appraisal does not merely describe the tasks performed during the relevant
         period, but also includes an assessment of the personal qualities shown by the individual assessed in the conduct of his professional
         life. Therefore, every official has a right to have his work recognised by means of an appraisal carried out in a just and
         equitable manner. Consequently, in accordance with the right to effective judicial protection, officials must in any event
         be acknowledged as having the right to challenge their staff report on account of its content or because it has not been drawn
         up in accordance with the rules laid down by the Staff Regulations.
      
      Thus the reassignment of an official from one institution to another institution, the second institution’s failure to take
         into consideration the staff reports drawn up by the first, and the promotion of the official within the second institution
         are not such as to remove his interest in bringing proceedings against a definitive staff report drawn up by the first of
         the institutions.
      
      (see paras 33-34)
      See:
      C-198/07 P Gordon v Commission [2008] ECR I‑10701, paras 44 and 45
      
      2.      It follows from Articles 10 to 12 of the general implementing provisions for Article 43 of the Staff Regulations, adopted
         by the Parliament, that that institution must give each of its officials or other staff, at the assessment interview, a copy
         of a document setting out the objectives assigned to his directorate, unit or department for the coming year. That document
         constitutes a vital element in the assessment of the official’s or staff member’s performance the following year and in the
         drawing up of his staff report. Furthermore, where the official or staff member so requests at the assessment interview, the
         administration must draw up a document providing further details of his own personal objectives.
      
      Even if those provisions do not explicitly govern a situation where an official is first assigned or is transferred from another
         institution to the Parliament in the course of the year, they may not be interpreted as meaning that the Parliament is not
         obliged to bring to that official’s attention the document setting out the objectives assigned to his department, to which
         he will be required to contribute. Such a document, which exists for every unit or department irrespective of the procedure
         for drawing up the staff report of each official or staff member, constitutes a reference point for assessing the performance
         of the official or staff member and drawing up the staff report. Any other interpretation of those provisions would infringe
         the principle of equal treatment, since it would have the effect of treating officials or staff members differently, regarding
         the assignment of objectives, depending on the date when they entered the Parliament, and that difference in treatment would
         be disproportionate to the difference in situation resulting from that factor. Moreover, for a new official it is particularly
         necessary to assign objectives when he arrives in a unit or department into which he must be integrated as quickly as possible.
      
      (see paras 51, 52, 54-55)