ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE (Fifth Chamber)

30 November 1998

Case T-97/94

N

v

Commission of the European Communities

‛Former officials — Staff report — Interest in bringing proceedings — Inadmissibility’

Full text in French   II-1879

Application for:

Decision:

Application dismissed.

Abstract of the Order

The applicant, N, entered into service with the Commission on 31 January 1983 as a grade A 4 official.

On 11 August 1993 he lodged a complaint against his staff report for the period from 1 July 1989 to 30 June 1991 (‘the contested staff report’). On 4 October 1993 the appointing authority removed the applicant from his post with effect from 1 December 1993. The applicant contested that decision removing him from his post in proceedings brought by him before the Court of First Instance, and subsequently in appeal proceedings which were dismissed on 16 July 1998. On 20 December 1993 the Commission rejected the applicant's complaint against the contested staff report. The procedure in that connection was suspended pending delivery of the judgment of the Court of Justice on 16 July 1998. The present action, seeking annulment of the implicit decision rejecting his complaint of 11 August 1993 and the contested staff report, was brought by the applicant on 9 March 1994.

Law

In order for an official or a former official to be able to bring an action under Articles 90 and 91 of the Staff Regulations of officials of the European Communities (‘the Staff Regulations’), he must have a personal interest in the annulment of the contested measure. That interest is to be assessed as at the time when the action is brought (paragraphs 22 and 23).

See: T-49/91 Turner v Commission [1992] ECR II-1855, para. 24; T-58/92 Moat v Commission [1993] ECR II-1443, para. 31

The primary function of a staff report, as an internal document, is to provide the administration with periodic information on the performance of their duties by officials (paragraph 25).

See: 6/79 and 97/79 Grassi v Council [1980] ECR 2141, para. 20; T-59/96 Burbau v Parliament [1997] ECRSC II-331, para. 73

It plays an important part in the progress of the career of an official, mainly as regards transfers and promotions. In principle, therefore, it affects the interest of the person assessed only until the termination of service of the person concerned. Consequently, after his service has terminated, an official is no longer entitled to bring an action, save for the purposes of establishing the existence of a particular fact justifying a current, personal interest in obtaining the annulment of the report in question (paragraph 26).

The applicant, who was no longer in the service of the Commission at the time when he brought his action, has not established the existence of any such fact.

The right to a fair hearing within the meaning of Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms does not preclude the application of the criteria laid down by Community law for the admissibility of an action, since the mere assertion by the applicant, without further justification, that his personal and professional reputation should be restored is not enough to establish that he has a personal interest. In those circumstances, he is not entitled to apply for annulment (paragraphs 30 and 31).

The application for compensation, which is closely linked to the application for annulment, is likewise inadmissible (paragraph 32).

See: T-5/90 Marcato v Commission [1991] ECR II-731, para. 49

Operative part:

The application is dismissed as inadmissible.