The European legislation, following the administrative practice of most EU Member States, provides for a prior and mandatory administrative mechanism for European officials or temporary staff to apply to the General Court of the EU and request the annulment of decisions that are contrary to their interests.
This is the appeal under Article 90 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the EU, the presentation of which is mandatory as a procedural requirement. If it is not filed in due time and form, the action for annulment subsequently filed with the General Court of the EU will be inadmissible.
According to Article 90, the deadline for submitting this appeal is three months from the notification of the resolution or acts that are harmful to the person concerned. The European institution has four months to respond to this claim. If, after this period, the administration has not replied, it is understood that there has been negative administrative silence.
It is necessary to specify what is meant by the term “adverse” used in Article 90, because not all decisions of the European administration are appealable. The CJEU has specified that harmful acts are those that may have a direct and immediate impact on the legal situation of the civil servant concerned.
In addition, it must be proven that the official has an existing interest at the time of filing the claim. Our firm successfully defended this argument before the CJEU against the arguments of Frontex’s opposing counsel in the case of a plaintiff who had left the Agency when she filed the appeal but had already started working in another European institution.
In that case, we argued and proved that there was still a strong interest at the time of bringing both the prior complaint and the Article 270 TFEU action before the General Court, because the Appraisal Reports drawn up annually by the officials’ superiors follow them throughout their careers within the European institutions. Therefore, it would not be correct to conclude that there was no interest merely because the person had left Frontex.
The most frequent acts adversely affecting civil servants in such cases are undoubtedly decisions relating to remuneration or classification in grade. Other cases in which we have acted as a law firm before the General Court include situations of psychological harassment, dealing with the possible liability of the institution for failing to act in a harassment situation.
Finally, the obligation to lodge the prior administrative appeal under Article 90 does not apply only to civil servants, but also to their family members, who, although they do not have the status of civil servants, are obliged to file this type of appeal because they hold a right derived from the deceased’s statutory relationship. This must be done before appealing to the CJEU, either by means of the action under Article 270 TFEU or through a claim for non-contractual liability under Article 340 TFEU.
This is the case, for example, of family members claiming survivor’s pensions or other benefits recognised in the EU Staff Regulations.
After the express resolution of the European administration ruling on the previous complaint, an appeal may be brought before the General Court within a strict period of three months from the notification of the decision. In the case of administrative silence, the claim is understood to have been dismissed four months after its submission, and from that date the three-month period for appealing to the General Court of the European Union begins to run.
As a general reflection, this type of appeal should undoubtedly be drafted by a specialised lawyer and not by the official personally, as they may not have the necessary legal knowledge to correctly challenge the decision in question. As lawyers, we have had to face the difficult challenge of correcting allegations that were poorly formulated during the preliminary complaint phase, which then continue to affect the case in the subsequent judicial appeal phase before the Court and cannot always be remedied by limiting the scope and force of the appeal itself.
At Navas&Cusí, we understand the complexity and strategic importance of administrative appeals within EU institutions. Having the right legal guidance from the outset can make a decisive difference in the outcome of your case. Our team includes a Lawyer specialized in European Union Law. who can assess your situation and defend your interests with precision. If you are facing a similar procedure, acting early with expert support is key.
