# C_2008313EN.01002501.xml

| 6.12.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 313/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 313/25

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 9 October 2008 — Wilms v Commission

(Case T-328/04) (1)

1

(Action for annulment - Action for damages - Staff case - Promotion - Award of priority points)

(2008/C 313/44)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Günter Wilms (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: M. van der Woude and V. Landes and, subsequently, by M. van der Woude, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: H. Tserepa-Lacombe and V. Joris, Agents, and, subsequently, by V. Joris and G. Berscheid, Agents, and D. Wealbroeck, lawyer)

Defendant:

Re:

An action for annulment of:

| — | the decision of the Director General of the Legal Service of the Commission to award the applicant only one Directorate-General priority point for the 2003 promotion procedure, communicated on 2 July 2003, confirmed by a decision of the appointing authority notified on 19 December 2003; |
| --- | --- |

—

the decision of the Director General of the Legal Service of the Commission to award the applicant only one Directorate-General priority point for the 2003 promotion procedure, communicated on 2 July 2003, confirmed by a decision of the appointing authority notified on 19 December 2003;

| — | the decision of the appointing authority not to award the applicant any special priority points for additional activity in the interests of the institution for the 2003 promotion procedure, notified through the Sysper 2 system on 19 December 2003; |
| --- | --- |

—

the decision of the appointing authority not to award the applicant any special priority points for additional activity in the interests of the institution for the 2003 promotion procedure, notified through the Sysper 2 system on 19 December 2003;

| — | the following decisions: the decision of the appointing authority to award the applicant a total of 19 points for the 2003 promotion procedure; the merit list of officials in grade A 6 for the 2003 promotion procedure published in Administrative Notices No 69-2003 of 13 November 2003; the list of officials promoted to grade A 5 for the 2003 promotion procedure and published in Administrative Notices No 73-2003 of 27 November 2003 and, in any event, the decision not to include the applicant's name on those lists. |
| --- | --- |

—

the following decisions: the decision of the appointing authority to award the applicant a total of 19 points for the 2003 promotion procedure; the merit list of officials in grade A 6 for the 2003 promotion procedure published in Administrative Notices No 69-2003 of 13 November 2003; the list of officials promoted to grade A 5 for the 2003 promotion procedure and published in Administrative Notices No 73-2003 of 27 November 2003 and, in any event, the decision not to include the applicant's name on those lists.

| — | in so far as it is necessary, the decision of the appointing authority of 14 June 2004 rejecting the complaint brought on 12 February 2004 by the applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

in so far as it is necessary, the decision of the appointing authority of 14 June 2004 rejecting the complaint brought on 12 February 2004 by the applicant;

| — | the decision of the appointing authority of 17 April 2007 not to award the applicant any additional priority points for the 2003 promotion procedure; |
| --- | --- |

—

the decision of the appointing authority of 17 April 2007 not to award the applicant any additional priority points for the 2003 promotion procedure;

and for compensation of EUR 5 000.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decisions of the Commission fixing the total promotion points for the applicant at 19 points and refusing to include his name on the list of officials promoted to grade A 5 for the 2003 promotion procedure; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decisions of the Commission fixing the total promotion points for the applicant at 19 points and refusing to include his name on the list of officials promoted to grade A 5 for the 2003 promotion procedure;

| 2. | Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3. | Orders the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Commission to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 273, 6.11.2004.

1

---