EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 1 March 2007. # Asa Sundholm v Commission of the European Communities. # Officials - Evaluation - Career development report - 2003 assessment procedure - Obligation to state the reasons on which the report is based - Rights of the defence. # Case F-30/05.

ECLI:EU:F:2007:31

62005FJ0030

March 1, 2007
With Google you find a lot.
With us you find everything. Try it now!

I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!

Valentina R., lawyer

(Officials – Appraisal – Career development report – 2003 appraisal – Obligation to state the reasons on which the report is based – Rights of the defence)

Application: brought under Articles 236 EC and 152 EA, in which Ms Sundholm seeks annulment of her career development report for the period from 1 January to 31 December 2003.

Held: The application is dismissed. The parties are ordered to bear their own costs.

Summary

(Staff Regulations, Art. 43)

(Staff Regulations, Arts 26, first and second paras, and 43)

(Staff Regulations, Art. 43)

1.The report to be used as a reference for determining whether the report for a particular year is less favourable than previous reports, requiring particular attention to be paid to the statement of reasons, is the periodic report for the previous year, whether or not it has subsequently been annulled.

(see para. 44)

2.Neither the fundamental principle of observance of the rights of the defence nor the first and second paragraphs of Article 26 of the Staff Regulations which give concrete expression to that principle make the fact that a matter may be held against an official in his appraisal report subject to the drawing-up, prior to the procedure leading to the adoption of that report, of a written warning and the communication of that warning to the individual concerned.

That individual is also not justified in claiming that his rights of defence have been infringed because of the failure to comply with internal directives of his institution concerning the obligation on hierarchical superiors to provide regular feedback on officials’ performance during the reference period itself. The requirement to observe the right to a fair hearing, that is to say, to offer an official to whom a decision adversely affecting him is addressed the opportunity to express his views adequately, applies only once the procedure liable to culminate in such a decision has been initiated. Thus, as regards the appraisal of officials, observance of that principle may be enforced only during the appraisal procedure, which necessarily commences after the end of the reference period.

(see paras 74, 76-78)

3.An official cannot reasonably plead, in support of an action directed against a career development report, that unauthorised third parties have had access to that report. Such a fact, even if established, would have no effect on the legality of that document.

(see para. 85)

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia