20In dismissing the plea concerning the assessment made in the performance appraisal for 1999, the Court of First Instance held, in paragraphs 68 to 71 of the judgment under appeal:68 Although he claims that the performance appraisal for 1999 is based on material factual errors, the applicant is seeking in fact to challenge the validity of the assessments made by his superiors of his work during 1999.69 It is not, however, for the Court to substitute its assessment for that of the persons responsible for appraising the applicant's work. The ECB, like other institutions and bodies of the Community, enjoys wide discretion in appraising the work of members of its staff. Judicial review by the Court of the assessments contained in the annual performance appraisal of a member of the ECB staff relates only to possible procedural irregularities, manifest factual errors in such assessments and any misuse of power (see, by analogy, Case T-63/89 Latham v Commission [1991] ECR II-19, paragraph 19).70 In the present case, as the applicant has failed to establish the existence of circumstances of that nature his complaints cannot be accepted.71 Moreover, the reasoning in the performance appraisal for 1999 is sufficiently precise to satisfy the requirements of Article 253 EC, applicable under Article 34.2 of the ESCB Statute to decisions taken by the ECB.’
Source: EUR-Lex, © European Union, 1998-2026. Reuse authorised under Decision 2011/833/EU.