Judgment No. 4894
Decision
1. The impugned decision of the Vice-President of DG4 of 11 September 2015 is set aside.
2. The EPO shall pay the complainant 1,500 euros in costs.
3. It shall also insert in the complainant’s personal file the Internal Appeals Committee’s opinion as stated in consideration 6 of this judgment.
4. All other claims are dismissed.
Summary
The complainant challenges his staff report for 2009.
Judgment keywords
Keywords
complaint allowed; performance report; rating
Considerations 3 and 6
Extract:
In its opinion of 1 December 2014, the Internal Appeals Committee firstly considered its role and secondly the merits of the complainant’s internal appeal. As to its role, it firstly noted, correctly, the limited role of the Tribunal in reviewing staff reports which are discretionary in nature. However, and importantly (a matter not understood by all internal appeals bodies), it said that an internal appeal body can “determine whether the decision under appeal is the correct decision or whether, on the facts, some other decision should have been made” citing Judgment 3161, consideration 6.
[…]
It is now convenient to consider the additional relief sought by the complainant. This includes that the text in his staff report for 2009 be amended by order of the Tribunal. But it has long been acknowledged that a request such as this would involve an impermissible determination by the Tribunal of what the appraisal should be (see, recently, Judgment 4786, consideration 1). The Tribunal noted in Judgment 4786 that it can, if the report was the product of one of the legal flaws listed in Judgment 4564, consideration 3, set aside the contested staff report at the same time as the impugned decision and remit the matter to the Organisation for review. However, this would be review of a report concerning the appraisal of the complainant some considerable time ago. There should be no such remittal though the complainant may gain some comfort from the conclusions of the Internal Appeals Committee (together with the observations of the Tribunal in this judgment), whose opinion should be included in his personnel file, if it is not already. It is also assumed that the present judgment will be included in his personnel file.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3161, 4564, 4786
Keywords
performance report; rating; judicial review; performance evaluation; role of the tribunal
Consideration 5
Extract:
In substance, the Vice-President of DG4 has failed to motivate the impugned decision […], which departed from the recommendation of the Internal Appeals Committee. He is legally obliged to do so (see, for example, Judgments 4772, consideration 12, 4762, consideration 8, and 4598, consideration 12). For this reason alone, the impugned decision should be set aside, as the complainant seeks.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4598, 4762, 4772
Keywords
motivation of final decision
|
