JUDGMENT OF THE CIVIL SERVICE TRIBUNAL
(First Chamber)

28 June 2011

Case F‑128/10

Aurora Mora Carrasco and Others

v

European Parliament

(Civil service — Officials — Inter-institutional transfer in the course of the promotion period during which the official would have been promoted in his institution of origin — Competent institution to decide on the promotion of the official transferred)

Application:      brought under Article 270 TFEU, applicable to the EAEC Treaty pursuant to Article 106a thereof, in which Ms Mora Carrasco, Ms Serrano Jimenez and Mr Görlitz seek annulment of the decision of the European Parliament not to promote them to grades AST 8, AST 5 and AD 7 respectively in the 2009 promotion period.

Held:      The action is dismissed. The Parliament is ordered to bear the costs of the applicants in addition to its own costs.

Summary

Officials — Promotion — Consideration of comparative merits — Inter-institutional transfer in the course of the promotion period — Competence of the institution of origin to decide on promotion

(Staff Regulations, Art. 45)

In accordance with the requirements of Article 45 of the Staff Regulations, where an official is eligible for promotion in the course of the year during which he is transferred, the appointing authority competent to decide on his promotion is that of the institution of origin.

Article 45 of the Staff Regulations states that promotion is effected after consideration of the comparative merits of the officials eligible for promotion and that, when considering their comparative merits, the appointing authority takes account in particular of the reports on the officials concerned.

In order to decide whether an official should be promoted with retroactive effect to 1 January of the year N (or even, more generally, during year N), the appointing authority can only, in practice, compare the past merits of officials, in particular during the year N-1 (and in the light of the assessment reports on the performance of those officials during the years N-1 and earlier). To that end, it is necessary to compare the merits of the officials transferred with those of the officials who were still their colleagues during the year prior to their transfer, and that assessment can only legitimately be conducted by the institution of origin.

(see paras 34-35, 39)