Judgment No. 2244
1. THE IMPUGNED DECISION IS SET ASIDE.
2. THE CASE IS SENT BACK TO THE EPO.
3. THE ORGANISATION SHALL PAY THE COMPLAINANTS THE OVERALL SUM OF 2,000 EUROS IN COSTS.
4. ALL OTHER CLAIMS PUT FORWARD BY THE COMPLAINANTS ARE DISMISSED.
5. THE BENEFIT OF THE PRESENT JUDGMENT SHALL BE EXTENDED TO THE INTERVENERS, SUBJECT TO THE COMMENTS UNDER 14.
Although "the complainants learnt from [a communiqué], addressed to all staff [...], that their appeal had been rejected [...] they were officially notified of the dismissal of their appeals only in [subsequent] letters [...], receipt of which they were asked to acknowledge. Contrary to the argument of the defendant, that was not a confirmation, but the first official notification of the decision to reject the internal appeals they had filed."
confirmatory decision; general decision; individual decision; receivability of the complaint; internal appeal; date of notification; time bar; information note
"Although the disputed decision is regulatory in character, it applies generally to a category of staff members whom it may adversely affect. The case law has it (see Judgments 1451 and 1618) that in such a case there is no need to await an individual decision before an appeal can be considered receivable, and that the staff members concerned have an interest in challenging the lawfulness of the general decision which may affect them. Their complaints are therefore receivable ratione personae."
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 1451, 1618
complaint; general decision; individual decision; locus standi; complainant; status of complainant; receivability of the complaint; internal appeal; case law
"The Tribunal notes that the competent bodies of the Organisation may repeal or modify rules they have established, subject to compliance with the principle that similar acts require similar rules, as pointed out in Judgment 1896, but that those bodies' discretionary powers are limited by the general principles of international civil service law, including the principle of equality, whereby officials in the same circumstances should be treated in the same way."
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 1896
procedure before the tribunal; general principle; equal treatment; organisation's duties; staff regulations and rules; amendment to the rules; provision; repeal; discretion