Judgment No. 2221

• Organization: European Patent Organisation (EPO)
• Date: 16.07.2003
• Original: English
• Judges: Gentot, Hugessen, Gaudron
• Full judgment text - Full judgment text (french)

Decision

1. THE COMPLAINT IS UPHELD.
2. THE DECISION OF THE PRESIDENT TO ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE APPEALS COMMITTEE IS SET ASIDE.
3. THE MATTER IS REMITTED TO THE PRESIDENT FOR DETERMINATION OF THE COMPLAINANT'S INTERNAL APPEAL BY ASCERTAINING WHETHER THE COMPLAINANT WOULD HAVE BEEN RECOMMENDED FOR PROMOTION EARLIER THAN 1 APRIL 2000 IF HIS 1994-95 STAFF REPORT HAD ALWAYS BEEN IN ITS PRESENT FORM.

Considerations 9-10

Extract:

"It is well settled that a promotion decision is a discretionary decision which can only be challenged on limited grounds. Moreover, it is settled that mere satisfaction of necessary criteria does not ordinarily confer a right to promotion. [...] It follows that the [competent authorities] were entitled to have regard, in determining whether to backdate the complainant's promotion, to all matters pertaining to his work performance, [including] his staff reports, even though the [applicable] guidelines made no reference to such reports."

Keywords

decision; grounds; organisation; competence; exception; applicable law; case law; administrative instruction; promotion; performance report; qualifications; judicial review; discretion; limits; consequence; criteria; elements; right