What happens after a legal consultation?

 

A legal consultation is the first step in determining whether or not legal action can/should be taken on a case, based on the solicitor's advice.

Please note that the SFE union prioritises conciliation over direct confrontation, which could lead to years of legal proceedings. Here are a few points to bear in mind:

 

• Each case is unique. The SFE union cannot be held responsible if a court rejects your claim or refuses to support your request after reviewing the case and receiving a favourable or unfavourable opinion from the solicitor..

​​

• The SFE will review the case submitted by you and/or the lawyer and decide independently (Executive Committee) whether or not to pursue the case and whether to cover (part or all) of the solicitor's fees. If the decision is negative, you have the option of continuing to pursue the case at your own expense before the DG HR or the Court of Justice.​​

​

• All communications must go through the SFE, yourself and the solicitor. It is strictly forbidden to contact the solicitor at any time (except at their request for specific information or documents) without notifying the SFE and copying them into the communications (‘Cc’). These communications and exchanges will be conducted exclusively by email. Failure to do so may result in the SFE withdrawing from the case and charging you for any costs incurred as a result of such abuse..

​​​​

• Under no circumstances will the SFE or the solicitor draft Article 90§1, 90§2 or 91 of the Staff Regulations on your behalf. The union and the solicitor will only provide you with assistance and advice on how to draft them..

​​

• The financial contribution from the SFE for a complaint or appeal, whichever the case may be, cannot exceed the amount decided by the Executive Committee. This amount cannot be combined with other contributions. If the amount exceeds this limit, you will be required to contribute to the legal fees.

​

• We continually refer to the established case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. The SFE may support a request if it can offer a collective benefit to all staff members of the institutions.

​​

• Finally, certain advantageous or disadvantageous provisions of the Staff Regulations cannot be amended (except in exceptional circumstances by the administration). Only Member States are authorised to review certain provisions, which could be akin to opening Pandora's box...

​

What do Articles 90 et seq. of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities refer to?

​

For internal appeals (for EPSO, see our section):

​

Article 90 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities

​

Paragraph 1: Any person covered by these Staff Regulations may submit a request to the appointing authority inviting it to take a decision in respect of that person. The authority shall notify the person concerned of its reasoned decision within four months of the date on which the request was submitted. At the end of this period, failure to respond to the request shall constitute an implied decision to reject it, which may be the subject of a complaint within the meaning of the following paragraph.

​

Paragraph 2: Any person covered by these Staff Regulations may lodge a complaint with the appointing authority against an act adversely affecting him, either because the authority has taken a decision or because it has failed to take a measure required by the Staff Regulations. The complaint must be lodged within three months.

​

This period shall run: — from the date of publication of the act in the case of a measure of a general nature; from the date of notification of the decision to the addressee and, in any event, no later than the date on which the person concerned becomes aware of it in the case of a measure of an individual nature; however, if an individual act is likely to cause prejudice to a person other than the addressee, this period shall run, with regard to that person, from the date on which they become aware of it and, in any event, no later than the date of publication;

 

— from the expiry date of the response period when the complaint concerns an implied decision of rejection within the meaning of paragraph 1.

 

The authority shall notify the person concerned of its reasoned decision within four months of the date on which the complaint was lodged. At the end of that period, failure to respond to the complaint shall constitute an implied decision to reject it, which may be appealed against within the meaning of Article 91.

​

Article 90a of the Staff Regulations (OLAF: European Anti-Fraud Office)

​

Any person covered by these Staff Regulations may submit to the Director of the European Anti-Fraud Office a request within the meaning of Article 90(1), inviting him to take a decision in relation to an investigation by the Office. They may also submit to the Director of the European Anti-Fraud Office a complaint within the meaning of Article 90(2) against an act of the Office adversely affecting them in connection with an investigation by the Office.

​

Article 90b of the Staff Regulations (European Data Protection Supervisor)​

​

Any person referred to in this Statute may submit a request or complaint to the European Data Protection Supervisor within the scope of his or her powers, in accordance with Article 90(1) and (2).

​

Article 90c of the Staff Regulations

​

Requests and complaints relating to matters covered by Article 2(2) shall be submitted to the appointing authority.

​

And then for external appeals:

​

Article 91 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities​

​

1. The Court of Justice of the European Union shall have jurisdiction to rule on any dispute between the Union and any of the persons referred to in this Statute concerning the legality of an act adversely affecting that person within the meaning of Article 90(2). In disputes of a pecuniary nature, the Court of Justice shall have unlimited jurisdiction.

 

2. An appeal to the Court of Justice of the European Union shall be admissible only:

— if the appointing authority has first been asked to review the matter in accordance with Article 90(2) and within the period laid down therein, and

— if that review has resulted in an express or implied decision rejecting the complaint.

 

3. The action referred to in paragraph 2 must be brought within three months. This period shall run:

— from the date of notification of the decision taken in response to the complaint;

— from the date of expiry of the time limit for reply, where the appeal relates to an implied decision rejecting a complaint lodged pursuant to Article 90(2); however, where an explicit decision rejecting a complaint is taken after the implied decision rejecting the complaint but within the time limit for appeal, the time limit for appeal shall start to run afresh.

 

4. By way of derogation from paragraph 2, the person concerned may, after lodging a complaint with the appointing authority within the meaning of Article 90(2), immediately bring an action before the Court of Justice, provided that the action is accompanied by an application for suspension of the operation of the contested act or for interim measures. In that event, the proceedings before the Court of Justice shall be suspended until such time as an explicit or implicit decision rejecting the complaint has been taken.

 

5. The actions referred to in this Article shall be heard and determined under the conditions laid down in the Rules of Procedure established by the Court of Justice of the European Union.

​

Article 91a of the Statute 

​

Actions in the areas covered by Article 2(2) shall be brought against the institution to which the appointing authority delegated to the appointing authority belongs.