This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62016TO0833
Order of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 23 October 2017.
Kevin Karp v European Parliament.
Action for annulment and for damages — Civil service — Members of the contract staff — Classification — Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations — Act not open to challenge — Preparatory act — Premature complaint — Failure to follow the pre-litigation procedure — Inadmissibility.
Case T-833/16.
Order of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 23 October 2017.
Kevin Karp v European Parliament.
Action for annulment and for damages — Civil service — Members of the contract staff — Classification — Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations — Act not open to challenge — Preparatory act — Premature complaint — Failure to follow the pre-litigation procedure — Inadmissibility.
Case T-833/16.
Court reports – general
Order of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 23 October 2017 — Karp v Parliament
(Case T‑833/16)
(Action for annulment and for damages — Civil service — Members of the contract staff — Classification — Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations — Act not open to challenge — Preparatory act — Premature complaint — Failure to follow the pre-litigation procedure — Inadmissibility)
|
1. |
Actions brought by officials—Prior administrative complaint—Time-limits—Point from which time starts to run—Notification (Staff Regulations, Art. 90(2); Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Communities, Art. 117) (see paras 22, 23) |
|
2. |
Actions brought by officials—Admissibility criteria—Regular conduct of the prior administrative procedure (Staff Regulations, Arts 90 and 91) (see paras 24-26) |
|
3. |
Actions brought by officials—Acts adversely affecting an official—Concept/Meaning/Definition—Offer of employment before the candidate’s acceptance—Not included (Staff Regulations, Art. 90(2)) (see paras 31, 32) |
|
4. |
Officials—Principles—Protection of legitimate expectations—Conditions—Specific assurances given by the authorities (see para. 36) |
|
5. |
Actions brought by officials—Application for damages linked to an application for annulment—Inadmissibility of the application for annulment entailing inadmissibility of the claim for compensation (Staff Regulations, Arts 90 and 91) (see para. 40) |
Re:
ACTION brought under Article 270 TFEU, seeking, first, annulment of the Parliament’s decisions classifying the applicant in function group I, grade 1, under the contract as an accredited parliamentary assistant concluded on 25 February 2015, and in function group II, grade 4, step 1, under the contract of employment as contract agent concluded on 12 May 2016 and, secondly, seeking compensation for the damages allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of those classifications.
Operative part
|
1. |
The request for an expedited procedure is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible. |
|
2. |
The action is dismissed as inadmissible. |
|
3. |
Mr Kevin Karp is ordered to pay the costs. |