This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62019TO0294
Order of the General Court (First Chamber) of 11 June 2020.
Patrick Vanhoudt and Others v European Investment Bank.
Action for annulment and for damages – Civil service – EIB staff – Reform of the EIB remuneration and salary progression system – Remuneration simulation tool – Act not open to challenge – Purely confirmatory act – No new and substantial facts – Non-material harm – No causal link – Action in part inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law.
Case T-294/19.
Order of the General Court (First Chamber) of 11 June 2020.
Patrick Vanhoudt and Others v European Investment Bank.
Action for annulment and for damages – Civil service – EIB staff – Reform of the EIB remuneration and salary progression system – Remuneration simulation tool – Act not open to challenge – Purely confirmatory act – No new and substantial facts – Non-material harm – No causal link – Action in part inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law.
Case T-294/19.
ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:2020:264
Order of the General Court (First Chamber) of 11 June 2020 – Vanhoudt and Others v EIB
(Case T‑294/19)
(Action for annulment and for damages – Civil service – EIB staff – Reform of the EIB remuneration and salary progression system – Remuneration simulation tool – Act not open to challenge – Purely confirmatory act – No new and substantial facts – Non-material harm – No causal link – Action in part inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law)
|
1. |
Actions brought by officials – Act adversely affecting an official – Decision taken after reconsideration of an earlier decision – Failure to rely on substantial new facts in the request for reconsideration – Act confirming a decision which was not challenged in time – Inadmissibility (Staff Regulations of Officials, Arts 90 and 91) (see paras 32, 33, 39, 40) |
|
2. |
Actions brought by officials – Staff of the European Investment Bank – Time limits – Requirement that action be brought within a reasonable time – Action brought following conciliation procedure – Request for conciliation procedure lodged with an unjustified delay of 13 months – Action inadmissible (Staff Regulations of the European Investment Bank) (see paras 46, 47, 49-51, 58, 64) |
|
3. |
Actions brought by officials – Plea of illegality – Incidental nature – Applicant entitled to bring an action against the measure forming the subject matter of the exception, but did not exercise that right – Not possible to plead illegality as an interlocutory issue (Art. 277 TFEU) (see para. 60) |
|
4. |
Officials – Staff of the European Investment Bank – Non-contractual liability – Conditions – Unlawfulness – Causal link – Cumulative conditions – One of those conditions not satisfied – Claim for compensation dismissed in its entirety (Art. 340, second para. TFEU) (see para. 70) |
|
5. |
Officials – Non-contractual liability of the institutions – Conditions – Causal link – Burden of proof (Art. 340, second para. TFEU) (see paras 71, 72) |
Re:
Application under Article 270 TFEU and Article 50a of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union seeking, first, annulment of the decision of the EIB of 31 January 2019 by which the EIB confirmed the decision of the Conciliation Board, which found that the conciliation procedure relating to the applicants’ requests to make available an official printout of the results of the remuneration simulation tool used to calculate the impact of the reforms and of the amicable settlement to compensate for the losses allegedly suffered as a result of the reforms had failed, and, second, compensation for the non-material damage allegedly suffered by the applicants as a result of that decision of 31 January 2019.
Operative part
|
1. |
The action is dismissed as in part inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law. |
|
2. |
Mr Patrick Vanhoudt and the other applicants whose names are listed in the annex shall pay the costs. |