1. 

Actions brought by officials—Purpose—Directions to the administration—Statements of law—Inadmissibility

(Arts 266(1) TFEU and 270 TFEU; Staff Regulations, Art. 91)

(see para. 48)

2. 

Officials—Vacancy—Post of head of unit—Procedure before the pre-selection panel—Observance of principle of impartiality—Scope—Observations on the preference of the nationality of the candidate, made by the director of the unit at issue prior to the start of the selection procedure—Sarcastic smile given by the president of the panel during the interview with the unsuccessful candidate—Infringement of the principle of impartiality

(Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 41(1); Staff Regulations, Art. 27)

(see paras 73-75, 80-83, 86, 87, 94)

3. 

Judicial proceedings—Production of evidence—No possibility offered by the EU courts to a party to comment on the content of a document—Infringement of the rights of the defence—Conditions

(Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 48)

(see paras 91, 92)

4. 

Actions brought by officials—Prior administrative complaint—Correspondence between the complaint and the application—Same subject-matter and legal basis—Submissions and arguments not made in the complaint—Admissibility

(Staff Regulations, Art. 91(2))

(see para. 98)

5. 

Appeal—Appeal held to be well founded—Annulment of a decision of the Civil Service Tribunal—Transfer to the General Court of jurisdiction to hear disputes between the EU and its agents—Whether the state of the proceedings permits final judgment to be given—Treatment of the case by the appeal court

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2016/1192, Art. 4)

(see para. 103)

6. 

Actions brought by officials—Acts adversely affecting an official—Decision rejecting a complaint—Rejection pure and simple—Confirmatory measure—Inadmissibility

(Staff Regulations, Art. 91(1))

(see para. 106)

7. 

Actions brought by officials—Prior administrative complaint—Rejection decision—Account taken of the reasoning therein

(Staff Regulations, Arts 90 and 91)

(see para. 107)

8. 

Actions brought by officials—Judgment annulling a measure—Effects—Annulment of a rejection of candidature—Restoration of the official concerned to his previous legal position—Consequent annulment of subsequent measures relating to third parties—Conditions—Annulment not constituting an excessive penalty—Possibility for the successful candidate to rely on the legitimate expectation that his appointment will be maintained—Not included—Condition—Action brought within the statutory time-limit

(Staff Regulations, Art. 91(1))

(see paras 110, 112)

9. 

Actions brought by officials—Judgment annulling a measure—Effects—Obligation to implement—Scope—Both the operative part and the grounds of the judgment to be taken into account—Judgment annulling a decision to appoint an official to a post—Compensation claim of an unsuccessful candidate as to the material harm suffered—Premature nature of the claim

(Art. 266 TFEU)

(see paras 119-122)

1. 

Sets aside the order of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 7 April 2016, Spadafora v Commission (F‑44/15), with the exception of the dismissal as manifestly inadmissible of the application for a declaration that, by virtue of the annulment of the decision of 30 June 2014, by which the Director General of the European Anti-Fraud Office appointed Ms D to the post of Head of the Legal Advice Unit of OLAF’s Investigation Support Directorate and of Decision Ares(2015) 43686 of 5 January 2015 of Ms K. Georgieva, Vice-President of the European Commission, rejecting the applicant’s claim (R/994/14), the selection procedure was vitiated by illegality from the moment that the illegality occurred;

2. 

Dismisses the remainder of the appeal;

3. 

Annuls the decision of 30 June 2014, by which the Director General of the European Anti-Fraud Office appointed Ms D to the post of Head of the Legal Advice Unit of OLAF’s Investigation Support Directorate;

4. 

Annuls Decision Ares(2015) 43686 of 5 January 2015 of Ms K. Georgieva, Vice-President of the European Commission, rejecting the applicant’s claim (R/994/14);

5. 

Dismisses the action at first instance insofar as Mr Sergio Spadafora seeks compensation for the material loss resulting from the loss of chance to be selected for the post of Head of the Legal Advice Unit of OLAF’s Investigation Support Directorate;

6. 

Orders the Commission to pay the costs of the appeal proceedings and those of the proceedings at first instance.