61988J0017

++++

1.Officials - Recruitment - Probationary official - Length under the Staff Regulations - Calculation - Terms - Probationary official on sick leave - Actual probationary period reduced in length - Infringement of Article 34(1 ) of the Staff Regulations - None

( Staff Regulations, Art . 34(1 ) )

2.Officials - Recruitment - Probationary period - Adverse assessment of the applicant' s abilities before the expiry of the probationary period laid down by the Staff Regulations - Continuance of the probationary period or dismissal - Administration' s discretion

( Staff Regulations, Art . 34(2 ), second paragraph )

3.Officials - Recruitment - Probationary period - Assessment of the results - Assessment of the probationary official' s abilities - Review by the Court - Limits

1.Periods of leave and the period following the drawing up of a probationary report are to be taken into account in calculating the period of the probationary period referred to in Article 34(1 ) of the Staff Regulations, since that provision does not require that the duties should be actually carried out during the whole of the probationary period ( see the judgment of 15 May 1985 in Case 3/84 Patrinos v Economic and Social Committee (( 1985 )) ECR 1421 ).

In consequence, in the case of a probationary official prevented from working because of illness, the appointing authority, which has a discretion, but no obligation, to extend the probationary period, may consider the probationary official' s performance of his duties during a shorter period in order to assess his abilities if that period constitutes a sufficient basis of assessment for the reporting officer .

2.It is apparent from the second paragraph of Article 34(2 ) of the Staff Regulations that where a probationary official' s abilities are the subject of an adverse interim report, of which there need be no prior warning to him, the appointing authority has a discretion to continue the probationary period or to dismiss the probationary official in accordance with the procedure provided for therein .

3.It is not for the Court to intervene in the assessment made by the institutions of the outcome of a probationary period or in their appreciation of the suitability of a candidate for a permanent appointment in the Community civil service, except where there are manifest errors of assessment or there is a misuse of powers ( see the abovementioned judgment of 15 May 1985 ).

In Case C-17/88

Dimitrios Patrinos, a former probationary official of the Economic and Social Committee of the European Communities, residing in Athens, represented by M . and O . Slusny, of the Brussels Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of E . Arendt, 4 rue Marie-Thérèse,

applicant,

v

Economic and Social Committee of the European Communities, represented by D . Bruggeman, Legal Adviser, acting as Agent, assisted by D . Lagasse, of the Brussels Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of Georgios Kremlis, a member of the Legal Department of the Commission of the European Communities, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg,

defendant,

APPLICATION for the annulment of the decision dismissing the applicant at the end of his probationary period,

THE COURT ( First Chamber )

composed of : Sir Gordon Slynn, President of Chamber, R . Joliet and G . C . RodrÍguez Iglesias, Judges,

( the grounds of the judgment are not reproduced )

hereby :

( 1 ) Dismisses the application;

( 2 ) Orders the parties to bear their own costs .