natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The average duration of proceedings was 19.7 months for judgments and 14 months for orders, which represents as light increase in the average duration of a case compared with the previous year.
Postopki, ki se končajo s sodbo, povprečno trajajo 19,7 meseca, postopki, ki se končajo s sklepom, pa 14mesecev, kar pomeni, da se je povprečnotrajanje postopka v primerjavi s preteklim letom nekoliko podaljšalo.
Appeals to theCourtofFirstInstance were brought against 37 decisions of the Tribunal, which represents 37 % of the decisions subject to appeal delivered by the Tribunal and 35% of the total number of cases brought to a close, apart from those unilaterally discontinued by one of the parties.
Pri Sodišču prve stopnje so bile vložene pritožbezoper 37 odločb, ki jih je izreklo Sodišče za uslužbence, kar pomeni 37 % izpodbijanih odločb in 35 % vseh končanih zadev, v kar niso všteti primeri enostranskega umika ene od strank.
Seven decisions oftheTribunal were set aside by theCourtofFirstInstance .
Sodišče prve stopnje je razveljavilo sedem odločb Sodišča za uslužbence.
During this year the Tribunal has continued to endeavour to answer the legislature’s appeal for the facilitation, at every stage of the procedure, of the amicable settlement of disputes.
Tega leta si je Sodišče za uslužbence prizadevalo izpolniti zakonodajalčevo željo olajšati mirno reševanje sporov na vseh stopnjah postopka.
Thus, seven cases were able to be brought to a close following an amicable settlement at the instigation of the Tribunal, most often at an informal meeting organised by the judge-rapporteur or during a hearing (1).
Tako je bilo sedem zadev končanih z mirno rešitvijo spora na predlog Sodišča za uslužbence, največkrat na neuradnem sestanku, ki ga je organiziral sodnik poročevalec, ali na obravnavi.1
For an example of an amicable settlement reached on the day of the hearing at the instigation of the Tribunal, see the order of 4 September 2008 in Case F-81/06 Duyster v Commission: in recognition of the inconvenience caused to the applicant by certain events which were the subject of the proceedings, the defendant undertook to pay her a lump sum of EUR 2000 and to sign, place on her personal file and send to her a letter prepared for her.
Kot primer mirnega reševanja spora na obravnavi na predlog Sodišča za uslužbence glej sklep z dne 4. septembra 2008 v zadevi Duyster proti Komisiji (F-81/06) – tožena stranka se je ob priznanju nevšečnosti, ki jih je povzročila tožeči stranki z nekaterimi dejanji, ki so bila predmet zadeve, zavezala zadevni stranki plačati pavšalni znesek 2000 EUR ter podpisati, vložiti v njen osebni spis in posredovati dopis, sestavljen v njeno korist.
These contain, inter alia, a compulsory form for the submission of any application for legal aid and a guide for legal aid applicants.
Navedena navodila vsebujejo med drugim obrazec, ki ga je treba izpolniti ob vsaki predložitvi vloge za pravno pomoč, in smernice prosilcem za pravno pomoč.
The account given below will describe the most interesting new case-law of the year, looking in turn at proceedings concerning the legality of measures and actions for damages (I), applications forinterim relief (II), and applications for legal aid (III).
V nadaljevanju bodo opisani najpomembnejši prispevki tega leta k sodni praksi, in sicer bodo najprej navedeni spori o zakonitosti in odškodninah (I), nato predlogiza izdajo začasneodredbe (II) ter vloge za pravno pomoč (III).
Proceedings concerning the legality of measures and actions for damages
Spori o zakonitosti in odškodnini
This section will examine the most important decisions on procedural matters, on the merits and on costs.
V tem poglavju bodo obravnavane najpomembnejše odločbe, ki se nanašajo na postopek, vsebino in stroške.
Procedural aspects
Postopek
Jurisdiction oftheTribunal
Pristojnost Sodišča za uslužbence
In Case F-88/07 Domínguez González v Commission (order of 12 November 2008), the Tribunal had to deal with a dispute arising from the performance of an employment contract subject to Belgian law containing a clause attributing jurisdiction to the courts of Brussels which was for the provision of technical assistance in the context of humanitarian aid to third countries.
V zadevi Domínguez González proti Komisiji (sklep z dne 12. novembra 2008, F-88/07) je Sodišče za uslužbence obravnavalo spor v zvezi z izvrševanjem pogodbe o zaposlitvi na podlagi belgijskega prava, ki vsebuje klavzulo o pristojnosti sodišča v Bruslju in katere predmet je bilo ponujanje tehnične pomoči v okviru humanitarne pomoči tretjim državam.
The Tribunal, having ascertained that the contract was made subject to national law rather than to the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the EuropeanCommunities (‘Conditions of Employment’) for reasons relating to a legitimate interest of the defendant and did not constitute a misuse of procedure, held that it had no jurisdiction to hear the dispute arising from the performance of the contract.
Sodišče za uslužbence je najprej ugotovilo, da sklicevanje navedene pogodbe na nacionalno pravo, in ne na Pogoje za zaposlitev drugih uslužbencev Evropskih skupnosti (v nadaljevanju: PZDU), ustreza legitimnemu interesu tožene stranke in ne pomeni izkrivljanja postopka, nato pa presodilo, da ni bilo pristojno za obravnavanje spora, nastalega v zvezi z izvrševanjem navedene pogodbe.
Conditions for admissibility
Pogoji za dopustnost
In Case F-4/07 Skoulidi v Commission (judgment of 21 February 2008) theTribunalmade clear, first, that, where there is an act adversely affecting an official, the conduct of the institution in connection with that act cannot give rise to a claim for damages, the prelitigation procedure for which starts with a request under Article 90(1) of the StaffRegula-tions of Officials of the EuropeanCommunities (‘the Staff Regulations’) unless the conduct in question can be dissociated from the act adversely affecting the official, and second, and most importantly, that an official may, in an action which is purely for damages, seek reparation for the damage caused by an act adversely affecting him without seeking the annulment of that act, provided that the prelitigation procedure is initiated by a complaint, as provided for by Article 90(2) of the StaffRegulations, against that act, and the three-month time limit set by that provision must be respected whether the applicant seeks reparation of material or, as here, non-material damage.
Sodišče za uslužbence je v sodbi z dne 21. februarja 2008 v zadevi Skoulidi proti Komisiji (F-4/07) pojasnilo, da je ob obstoju akta, ki posega v položaj, ravnanje institucije, povezano s tem aktom, lahko podlaga za odškodninsko tožbo, glede katere se predhodni postopek začne s predlogom na podlagi člena 90(1) Kadrovskih predpisov za uradnike Evropskih skupnosti (v nadaljevanju: Kadrovski predpisi), prvič, samo če je zadevno ravnanje mogoče ločiti od akta, ki posega v položaj, in predvsem, drugič, če lahko uradnik odpravo škodljivih posledic, ki naj bi jih povzročil akt, ki posega v njegov položaj, zahtevana podlagi samostojne odškodninske tožbe, ne da bi pri tem zahteval razglasitev ničnosti tega akta, in sicer če je predhodni postopek začel na podlagi pritožbezoper navedeni akt, ki jo mora pritožnik, ki zahteva povrnitev premoženjske škode oziroma v obravnavani zadevi nepremoženjske škode, v skladu z določbo člena 90(2) Kadrovskih predpisov vložiti v roku treh mesecev.
In its judgments of 23 April 2008 in Case F-103/05 Pickering v Commission and Case F-112/05 BainandOthersvCommission, theTribunalmade clear that, although salary statements are generally considered to be acts adversely affecting officials insofar as they demonstrate that the pecuniary rights of an official have been adversely affected, in fact the real act adversely affecting the official is the decision taken by the appointing authority to reduce or cancel a payment which the official had hitherto received and which appeared in his salary statements.
Sodišče za uslužbence je v sodbah z dne 23. aprila 2008 v zadevi Pickering proti Komisiji (F-103/05) in v zadevi Bain in drugi proti Komisiji (F-112/05) pojasnilo, da se plačilne liste na splošno res štejejo za akte, ki posegajo v položaj, saj izkazujejo negativen vpliv na uradnikove prejemke, a dejansko posega v položaj odločba o zmanjšanju ali odpravi plačila, do katerega je bil uradnik dotlej upravičen in je bilo navedeno na njegovih plačilnih listah, ki jo sprejme organ, pristojen za imenovanja (v nadaljevanju: OPI).
In its judgment of 11 December 2008 in Case F-58/07 Collote vCommission, the Tribunal held that, in a case where two successive complaints lodgedwithin the time limit for complaints are the subject of two successive decisions by the appointing authority, if the second complaint includesmatters not covered in the first complaint, the decision rejecting the second complaint should be considered to be a new decision, adopted after reconsideration of the decision to reject the first complaint in the light of the second complaint.
Sodišče za uslužbence je s sodbo z dne 11. decembra 2008 v zadevi Collote proti Komisiji (F-58/07) razsodilo, da kadar sta podlaga za zaporedni odločbi OPI dve zaporedni pritožbi, vloženi v roku za pritožbo, je treba odločbo o zavrnitvi druge pritožbe, če ta vsebuje nove dokaze v primerjavi s prvo, šteti za novo odločbo, sprejeto po ponovni presoji odločbe o zavrnitvi prve pritožbe glede na drugo pritožbo.
Accordingly, the time allowed for bringing an action starts to run from the date of service of the reply to the second complaint.
Zato začne rok za vložitev tožbe teči od datuma prejema odgovora na drugo pritožbo.
Procedural issues
Procesno vprašanje
In Domínguez González vCommission, following objections of inadmissibility and lack of competence raised by the defendant, the Tribunal, for the first time, ruled on its competence by order following a hearing, on the basis of the second subparagraph of Article 78(2) of the Rules of Procedure, which provides that, unless the Tribunal decides otherwise, the remainder of the proceedings is to be oral.
Sodišče za uslužbence je v zgoraj navedeni zadevi Domínguez González proti Komisiji na podlagi ugovora nedopustnosti in nepristojnosti, ki ga je podala tožena stranka, o svoji pristojnosti prvič odločilo s sklepom, in sicer potem ko je opravilo obravnavo na podlagi določbe iz člena 78(2), drugi pododstavek, Poslovnika, v kateri je določeno, da se ta predlog obravnava ustno, razen če Sodišče za uslužbence ne odloči drugače.
Request for removal of documents
Predlog za izločitev dokumentov
In its judgment of 8 May 2008 in Case F-6/07 Suvikas v Council, the Tribunal ordered documents drawn up by a member of an advisory selection committee, outside of the selection procedure, to be removed from the case-file, as those documents were obtained by the applicant through the intermediary of a third party who had himself obtained them unlawfully.
Sodišče za uslužbence je v sodbi z dne 8. maja 2008 v zadevi Suvikas proti Svetu (F-6/07) odredilo, da je treba dokumente, ki jih je član posvetovalnega izbirnega odbora sestavil zunaj izbirnega postopka, izločiti iz spisovnega gradiva, saj jih je tožeča stranka prejela po tretji osebi, ki jih je pridobila nezakonito.
Actions for annulment: plea of breach of the scope of the law raised by the Tribunal of its own motion
Ničnostna tožba: preizkus tožbenega razloga kršitve področja uporabe zakona po uradni dolžnosti
In its judgment of 21 February 2008 in Case F-31/07* Putterie-De-Beukelaer v Commission (under appeal to theCourtofFirstInstance ), the Tribunal classified a plea of breach of the scope of the law as a public policy plea.
Sodišče za uslužbence je v sodbi z dne 21. februarja 2008 v zadevi Putterie-De-Beukelaer proti Komisiji (F-31/07*), zoper katero je bila vložena pritožba pri Sodišču prve stopnje, opredelilo tožbeni razlog javnega reda, ki se nanaša na kršitev področja uporabe zakona.
The Tribunal held that it would be neglecting its function as the arbiter of legality if, even in the absence of a challenge by the parties in this regard, it failed to make a finding that the contested decision before the Tribunal had been adopted on the basis of a rule that was not applicable to the case in point and if, as a consequence, it was led to adjudicate on the dispute before it by itself applying such a rule.
Ugotovilo je namreč, da bi kršilo dolžnost presoje zakonitosti, če ne bi ugotovilo – tudi če stranke tega ne bi izpodbijale –, da je bila odločba, ki se je pred tem sodiščem izpodbijala, sprejeta na podlagi pravila, ki ga v obravnavani zadevi ni mogoče uporabiti, in če bi nato o sporu, v katerem razsoja, odločilo na podlagi takega pravila.
The judgments marked with an asterisk have been translated into all the official languages of the European Union.
Sodbe, označene z zvezdico, so prevedene v vse uradne jezike Evropske unije.
Merits
Vsebina
An analysis will be made here of the year’s most significant new developments in the case-law, as regards general principles and, then, in the order of the headings of the StaffRegulations, as regards the rights and obligations of officials, the career of officials and the emoluments and social security benefits of officials and, finally, the interpretation of the Conditions of Employment.
Opisani bodo najpomembnejši prispevki k sodni praksi leta 2008 glede splošnih načel, nato – v zaporedju poglavij Kadrovskih predpisov – glede pravic in obveznosti, kariere, prejemkov in socialnih ugodnosti uradnika ter na koncu glede razlage PZDU.
Withdrawal of an unlawful administrative measure
Odprava nezakonitega upravnega akta
In its judgment of 11 September 2008 in Case F-51/07* Bui Van v Commission (under appeal to theCourtofFirstInstance ), the Tribunal, addressing the question of the lawfulness of the withdrawal of an unlawful administrative measure, held that the withdrawal of such a measure must take place within a reasonable period and that the reasonableness of that period is to be appraised in the light of the circumstances specific to each case such as the importance of the case for the person concerned, its complexity and the conduct of the parties involved, whether the measure in question confers subjective rights and the balance of interests.
Sodišče za uslužbence je v sodbi z dne 11. septembra 2008 v zadevi Bui Van proti Komisiji (F-51/07*), zoper katero je bila vložena pritožba pri Sodišču prve stopnje, v okviru vprašanja zakonitosti izločitve nezakonitega upravnega akta pojasnilo, da je treba tak akt odpraviti v razumnem roku, ki ga je treba presojati glede na posebne okoliščine vsake zadeve, med katerimi so pomen, ki ga ima spor za zainteresirano osebo, zapletenost zadeve, ravnanje navzočih strank, vprašanje, ali so bile z zadevnim aktom ustvarjene pravice, ter tehtanje interesov.
It must be considered, as a general rule, that a period for withdrawal corresponding to the three-month period for bringing proceedings laid down in Article 91(3) of the StaffRegulations is reasonable.
Praviloma je treba rok za odpravo, ki ustreza trimesečnemu roku za vložitev tožbe iz člena 91(3) Kadrovskihpredpisov, šteti za razumen.
Since that period applies to the administration itself, it is appropriate to take, as the starting point, the date on which the administration adopted the measure which it intends to withdraw.
Ker je ta rok za upravo obvezen, je treba kot začetek roka upoštevati datum sprejetja akta, ki ga namerava uprava odpraviti.
Moreover, the Tribunal has held that the decision towithdraw the unlawful measure must observe the rights of the defence of the official concerned.
Poleg tega je Sodišče za uslužbence razsodilo, da je treba odločbo o odpravi nezakonitega akta sprejeti ob spoštovanju pravice do obrambe zadevnega uradnika.
In this case, the Tribunal considered that the fact that the applicant was not afforded the opportunity to submit his observations before the adoption of the contested decision was not such as to influence the content of that decision, inasmuch as the observations submitted by the applicant to the Tribunal contain no information over and above that already available to the Commission.
Sodišče za uslužbence je v obravnavani zadevi menilo, da nespoštovanje pravice tožeče stranke, da se izreče, ni moglo vplivati na vsebino izpodbijanega akta, ker v stališčih, ki jih je podala tožeča stranka pred Sodiščem za uslužbence, ni nobene dodatne informacije, temveč le tiste, ki so bile Komisiji že prej na voljo.
The Tribunal held, on the other hand, that in disregarding the applicant’s right to be heard the Commission committed a wrongful act in the performance of public duties which gave rise to its liability.
Nasprotno, Sodišče za uslužbence je razsodilo, da je Komisija z nespoštovanjem pravice tožeče stranke, da se izreče, ravnala nepravilno, zato je podan temelj njene odgovornosti.
Compliance with a judgment of the Community court
Izvršitev sodbe sodišča Skupnosti
In its judgment of 24 June 2008 in Case F-15/05* Andres andOthers v ECB, the Tribunal, sitting as a full court, held that when compliance with a judgment annulling a measure poses special difficulties, the institution concerned may take any decision which is such as to compensate fairly for the disadvantage resulting for the persons concerned from the annulled decision.
Sodišče za uslužbence je v sodbi z dne 24. junija 2008 v zadevi Andres in drugi proti ECB (F-15/05*) na plenarnem zasedanju razsodilo, da lahko, kadar izvršitev ničnostne sodbe pomeni posebno težavo, zadevna institucija sprejme odločitev, s katero je mogoče pravično nadomestiti škodo, ki za zadevno stranko nastane z odločbo, ki je bila razglašena za nično.
In that context, the administration may establish a dialogue with those persons with a view to seeking to reach an agreement offering them fair compensation for the illegality of which they were victims.
V tem okviru lahko uprava s stranko začne dialog, s katerim poskuša doseči sporazum o pravičnem nadomestilu za nezakonitost, katere žrtev je bila.
As regards compliance with a judgment declaring unlawful the procedure for adjusting the salaries of staff of the European Central Bank for a given year by reason of the failure to consult the Staff Committee in a regular and appro-
Izvršitev sodbe, v kateri je bil postopek prilagoditve plač zaposlenih v Evropski centralni banki za zadevno leto razglašen za nezakonit, ker se uprava ni redno in primerno posvetovala s svetom zaposlenih, pomeni pravično in razumno rešitev, pri čemer je sporazumna rešitev sestavljena iz, prvič, razširitve posvetovanja tudi na poznejša leta, ko posvetovanj prav tako ni bilo, in upoštevanja nekaterih popravljenih podatkov, če bi to koristilo zaposlenim, ter, drugič, dogovora, da povečanja plač, ki so rezultat navedenega posvetovanja, veljajo za vse zaposlene, ne le za tožeče stranke, čeprav posebne težave onemogočajo retroaktivnost ugotovljenih povečanj.
In its judgment of 9 September 2008 in Case F-135/07 Smadja v Commission (under appeal to theCourtofFirstInstance ), the Tribunal recalled that the retroactive effect of an administrative measure may be a necessary means of guaranteeing respect for a fundamental principle such as the principle of proportionality.
Sodišče za uslužbence je v sodbi z dne 9. septembra 2008 v zadevi Smadja proti Komisiji (F-135/07), zoper katero je bila vložena pritožba pri Sodišču prve stopnje, opozorilo, da retroaktivnost upravnega akta lahko pomeni ukrep, potreben za zagotovitev spoštovanja temeljnega načela, kot je načelo sorazmernosti.
In this case, by failing, without good reason, to backdate the decision appointing the applicant, adopted after the entry into force of the new StaffRegulations, to the date of the adoption of the initial decision to appoint, adopted under the old StaffRegulations and annulled by judgment of theCourtofFirstInstance , so as to guarantee the applicant the higher grading she held at the date of delivery of that judgment, or by refusing to attach to the contested decision any other measure which would have been liable to reconcile the interest of the service with the legitimate interests of the applicant, the Commission failed to respect the interest of the service and its duty to have regard for the welfare of its servants.
V obravnavani zadevi je Komisija – s tem, da brez utemeljenega razloga ni določila, da po začetku veljavnosti novih Kadrovskih predpisov sprejeta odločba o imenovanju tožeče stranke učinkuje retroaktivno, in sicer od datuma sprejetja prvotne odločbe o imenovanju, sprejete na podlagi prejšnjih Kadrovskih predpisov in razglašene za nično s sodbo Sodiščaprvestopnje , da bi tožeči stranki zagotovila višjo razporeditev, kot jo je imela na dan, ko je bila izrečena navedena sodba, in s tem, da v izpodbijani odločbi ni določila ukrepa za uskladitev interesa službe in zakonitega interesa tožeče stranke – kršila načelo sorazmernosti in svojo dolžno skrbnost.
In its judgment of 11 July 2008 in Case F-89/07 Kuchta v ECB concerning the lawfulness of an individual decision adjusting the salary of a member of the staff of the ECB, the Tribunal recalled that the rules of good administration in staff management require, inter alia, that the distribution of powers within any Community body or institution should be clearly defined and properly publicised.
Sodišče za uslužbence je v sodbi z dne 11. julija 2008 v zadevi Kuchta proti ECB (F-89/07), v kateri je presojalo vprašanje zakonitosti posamične odločbe o prilagoditvi plače zaposlenega v ECB, opozorilo, da pravila dobre uprave na področju vodenja zaposlenih predpostavljajo zlasti, da je delitev pristojnosti v okviru vsakega organa ali institucije Skupnosti jasno opredeljena in pravilno objavljena.
The Tribunal annulled the contested decision, having found that it had not be enable to determine its author or the authority which had been empowered by the Executive Board of the ECB to take such a decision.
Potem ko je Sodišče za uslužbence ugotovilo, da nemore opredeliti niti avtorja niti organa, ki ga je izvršilni odbor ECB pooblastil za sprejetje take odločbe, je sporno odločbo razglasilo za nično.
Rights and obligations of officials
Pravice in obveznosti uradnikov
In its judgment of 9 December 2008 in Case F-52/05* Q vCommission, the Tribunal interpreted for the first time Article 12a(3) of the StaffRegulations which defines psychological harassment as any improper conduct that takes place over a period, is repetitive or systematic and involves physical behaviour, spoken or written language, gestures or other acts that are intentional and that may undermine the personality, dignity or physical or psychological integrity of any person.
Sodišče za uslužbence je v sodbi z dne 9. decembra 2008 v zadeviQproti Komisiji (F-52/05*) prvič razlagalo člen 12a(3) Kadrovskihpredpisov, v katerem je psihično nasilje opredeljeno kot vsako neprimerno ravnanje, ki traja, se ponavlja ali je sistematično in vključuje ê z ič no vedenje, govorjen ali pisan jezik, geste ali druga dejanja, ki so namerna in lahko razvrednotijo osebnost, dostojanstvo ali ê z ič no ali psihološko integriteto katere koli osebe.
The Tribunal held that it is not a requirement, for a finding of psychological harassment within the meaning of that provision, that such physical behaviour, spoken or written language, gestures or other acts were committed with the intention of undermining the personality, dignity or physical or psychological integrity of the person concerned.
Sodišče za uslužbence je menilo, da za ugotovitev psihičnega nasilja v smislu te določbe ni potrebno, da bi bili navedeni ê z ič no vedenje, govorjen ali pisan jezik, geste ali druga dejanja, storjeni z namenom razvrednotiti osebnost, dostojanstvo ali ê z ič no ali psihološko integriteto zadevne osebe.
It is sufficient that such reprehensible conduct led objectively to such consequences.
Dovolj je, da so zaradi navedenih ravnanj objektivno nastale take posledice.
The Tribunal had occasion to clarify the scope of several rules applicable to competitions.
Sodišče za uslužbence je imelo priložnost pojasniti domet več pravil, ki se uporabljajo pri natečajih.