This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 61969CJ0013
Summary of the Judgment
Summary of the Judgment
++++
1 . EAEC OFFICIALS - DISCIPLINARY PROVISIONS - OPINION OF THE DISCIPLINARY BOARD TRANSMITTED TO THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY - TIME-LIMIT FIXED FOR THE DECISION OF THE LATTER - OBJECT OF THE PROVISION RELATING THERETO - DUTIES OF THE ADMINISTRATION - FAILURE TO OBSERVE THE TIME-LIMIT - EFFECTS
( EAEC STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS, ANNEX IX, ARTICLE 7 )
2 . EAEC OFFICIALS - DISCIPLINARY PROVISIONS - OPINION OF THE DISCIPLINARY BOARD ON THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE SHORTCOMINGS OF THE PERSON CONCERNED AND THE CHOICE OF DISCIPLINARY MEASURE - POWER OF DISCRETION OF THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY
( EAEC STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS, ANNEX IX, ARTICLE 7 )
1 . BY FIXING A TIME-LIMIT FOR THE DECISION OF THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY, THE THIRD PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 7 OF ANNEX IX TO THE EAEC STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS LAYS DOWN A RULE OF GOOD ADMINISTRATION THE PURPOSE OF WHICH IS TO AVOID IN THE INTERESTS BOTH OF THE ADMINISTRATION AND OF OFFICIALS UNJUSTIFIED DELAY ON THE PART OF THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY IN ADOPTING THE DECISION TERMINATING THE DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS . THE PROVISION IN QUESTION IMPOSES ON THE INSTITUTION THE OBLIGATION TO USE ITS BEST ENDEAVOURS TO OBSERVE THE TIME-LIMIT FIXED .
THE TIME-LIMIT LAID DOWN BY THE THIRD PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 7 OF ANNEX IX TO THE EAEC STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS CANNOT BE REGARDED AS A MANDATORY PERIOD OF LIMITATION THE FAILURE TO OBSERVE WHICH ENTAILS THE NULLITY OF MEASURES ADOPTED AFTER ITS EXPIRY . FAILURE TO OBSERVE THE TIME-LIMIT MAY, HOWEVER, AS REGARDS THE INSTITUTION, AMOUNT TO AN OMISSION CAPABLE OF RENDERING IT LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGE CAUSED TO THOSE CONCERNED .
2 . THE EVALUATION OF THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE SHORTCOMINGS FOUND BY THE DISCIPLINARY BOARD IN RESPECT OF THE OFFICIAL AND THE CHOICE OF THE DISCIPLINARY MEASURE WHICH APPEARS, IN VIEW OF THOSE SHORTCOMINGS, AS BEING THE MOST APPROPRIATE, LIE WITHIN THE DISCRETIONARY POWER OF THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY . THE COURT CANNOT CRITICIZE THIS CHOICE, UNLESS THE MEASURE IMPOSED IS DISPROPORTIONATE TO THE FACTS FOUND AGAINST THE OFFICIAL .