Keywords
Summary

Keywords

1 Officials - Career - Promotion to a higher category - Competition required - Appointment taking effect from a date prior to success in a competition - Not permissible

(Staff Regulations, Art. 45(2))

2 Actions for annulment - Judgment annulling a measure - Effects - Obligations of the administration - Compensation for damage, suffered by the applicant, linked to the annulled measure and continuing after the annulment

(EC Treaty, Arts 176 and 215, second para.)

3 Officials - Non-contractual liability of the institutions - Conditions - Fault on the part of the administration - Damage - Causal link - Assessment of non-material damage - Criteria

4 Appeals - Pleas in law - Plea alleging infringement of Article 48(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance prohibiting the introduction of new pleas in the course of proceedings - Account taken by the Court of First Instance of the replies to a question raised as a measure of organisation of procedure - Whether permissible

(Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Arts 48(2) and 64(3))

5 Appeals - Pleas in law - Inadequate grounds - No details as to the criteria adopted by the Court of First Instance in order to fix the amount of the compensation awarded for damage suffered - Appeal well founded

Summary

1 In accordance with Article 45(2) of the Staff Regulations, an official may be promoted from one category to another only on the basis of a competition. Since success in a competition is thus a conditio sine qua non of appointment in a higher category, that condition must be satisfied on the date on which the appointment takes effect. Article 45(2) of the Staff Regulations therefore precludes an appointment taking effect from a date prior to success in a competition.

2 Article 176 of the Treaty requires not only that the administration take the necessary measures to comply with a judgment of the Court but that it make good further damage which may be caused by the unlawful measure which has been annulled, subject to the conditions laid down in the second paragraph of Article 215 of the Treaty. Thus Article 176 of the Treaty does not make compensation for the damage dependent on the existence of a new fault distinct from the original unlawful measure which has been annulled, but provides for compensation for the damage which results from that measure and which continues after its annulment and compliance by the administration with the judgment whereby it was annulled.

3 For the liability of the Community to be incurred in the case of a claim for damages brought by an official, a number of conditions must be satisfied as regards the illegality of the conduct of the institution of which he complains, the actual harm suffered and the existence of a causal link between that conduct and the damage alleged to have been suffered.

For the purposes of assessing any non-material damage, aggravating circumstances characterising the specific situation must be taken into account.

4 Under Article 48(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, the introduction of any new plea in law in the course of proceedings is prohibited, unless it is based on matters of law or of fact which come to light in the course of the procedure.

The fact that the Court of First Instance took into account replies from one of the parties to questions raised by way of measures of organisation of procedure pursuant to Article 64(3) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, the other party having had an opportunity at the hearing to state its views on that point, is not contrary to Article 48(2).

5 It is for the Court of First Instance alone to assess, within the confines of the claim, the method and extent of compensation for the damage. However, in order for the Court of Justice to be able to review the judgments of the Court of First Instance, those judgments must be sufficiently reasoned. That is not the case where, in a judgment, the Court of First Instance has not set out the criteria taken into account for the purposes of determining the amount of the compensation awarded for the damage suffered.