Background to the dispute
8The applicant, MrIvo Van Walle, was recruited on 1November 2010 by ECDC as a member of the temporary staff. On 23March 2015 his contract was renewed until 31October 2020. At that stage, ECDC decided not to renew his contract.
9On 18July 2017, ECDC published a vacancy notice for a post for which the applicant applied on 27August 2017. His application was rejected by decision of 26October 2017. On 23January 2018, the applicant lodged a complaint against the decision rejecting his application on the basis of Article90(2) of the Staff Regulations. His complaint was rejected on 22May 2018.
10In 2018, the applicant’s appraisal in the context of the staff development dialogue for 2017 led to the conclusion that his performance had been satisfactory. That appraisal nevertheless contained negative comments on his conduct. On 12March 2018, the applicant contested that appraisal but his challenge was rejected by decision of 11April 2018. On 13May 2018, the applicant submitted a complaint under Article90(2) of the Staff Regulations.
11On the same day, the applicant submitted a request for assistance under Article24 of the Staff Regulations on account of a difficult working relationship with his line manager. Following that request, the Director of ECDC invited him, on 1June 2018, to submit additional information and evidence, which was provided on 23August 2018. By decision of 25September 2018, the Director rejected the request for assistance made by the applicant and proposed ‘team coaching’ sessions. The first session, scheduled for 23April 2019, was postponed until 13May 2019.
12Jobholders were invited to submit their self-assessments as part of the staff development dialogue for 2018. On 14January 2019, the applicant submitted his self-assessment.
13On 16January 2019, the Head of the Disease Programme Food and Waterborne Diseases (‘the FWD programme’) submitted observations on the applicant’s performance in so far as he had worked partly under her supervision during the reference period. On 17January 2019, a formal dialogue between the applicant and his line manager, as reporting officer, took place. On 28January 2019, the reporting officer, while finding the applicant’s efficiency and ability satisfactory, drew up a report in which he reached the overall conclusion that the applicant’s performance had been unsatisfactory in 2018 in the light of his ‘conduct in the service’ (‘the contested report’).
14On 1February 2019, that appraisal was confirmed by the countersigning officer. On 8February 2019, the applicant rejected the report drawn up by the countersigning officer, pursuant to Article7 of the Implementing Rule.
15The Director of ECDC, in her capacity as appeal assessor, held a meeting with the applicant on 4March 2019 concerning that report. The appeal assessor also received comments from the applicant’s line manager, from the Head of Section and from the applicant’s head of unit. By decision of 8March 2019, the appeal assessor confirmed the report.
16On 6June 2019, the applicant lodged a complaint against the contested report on the basis of Article90(2) of the Staff Regulations. By decision of 7October 2019, that complaint was rejected by ECDC (‘the decision rejecting the complaint’).
17On 9June 2020, on the basis of Regulation (EC) No1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L145, p.43), and of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23October 2018 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by the Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Regulation (EC) No45/2001 and Decision No1247/2002/EC (OJ 2018 L295, p.39), the applicant submitted a request for access to documents in the context of his complaint against the decision not to renew his contract. In his request, the applicant asked to be sent any document relating to the alleged issues of his conduct in the service. Following that request, ECDC sent him documents which were, inter alia, part of his appraisal reports.