41Thus it should be noted in particular that, according to settled case-law, although the AECE need not state reasons for a decision on promotion either to the person promoted or to the persons not promoted (Case 111/86 Delauche v Commission [1987] ECR 5345, paragraph 13; Joined Cases T-112/96 and T-115/96 Séché v Commission [1999] ECR-SC I-A-115 and II-623, paragraph 76; and Joined Cases T-338/00 and T-376/00 Morello v Commission [2002] ECR-SC I-A-301 and II-1457, paragraph 48), it has, by contrast, an obligation to give reasons for a decision rejecting a complaint lodged under Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations by a candidate who has not been promoted, since the reasons given for the latter decision are deemed to be the same as those for the decision which was the subject of the complaint (Case 188/73 Grassi v Council [1974] ECR 1099, paragraph 13; Case C-343/87 Culin v Commission [1990] ECR I-225, paragraph 13; and Case T-52/90 Volger v Parliament [1992] ECR II-121, paragraph 36). The statement of reasons must be made no later than the rejection of the complaint (Case T-117/01 Roman Parra v Commission [2002] ECR-SC I-A-27 and II-121, paragraph 26, and Case T-132/03 Casini v Commission [2005] ECR-SC I-A-253 and II-1169, paragraph 32).
Source: EUR-Lex, © European Union, 1998-2026. Reuse authorised under Decision 2011/833/EU.