# C_2014351EN.01001602.xml

| 6.10.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 351/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.10.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 351/16

---

Appeal brought on 28 July 2014 by Victor Navarro against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 21 May 2014 in Case F-46/13 Navarro v Commission

Navarro

Commission

(Case T-556/14 P)

2014/C 351/20

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Victor Navarro (Sterrebeek, Belgium) (represented by S. Rodrigues and A. Blot, lawyers)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Other party to the proceedings:

Form of order sought by the appellant

Form of order sought by the appellant

| — | Set aside the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 21 May 2014 in Case F-46/13; |
| --- | --- |

—

Set aside the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 21 May 2014 in Case F-46/13;

| — | Consequently, grant the appellant the relief sought at first instance and, accordingly:






  — | Annul the decision of the European Commission, as the authority empowered to conclude contracts, of 4 October 2012, not to recruit the appellant as an auxiliary member of the contractual staff in function group II; |
| --- | --- | --- |

—

Consequently, grant the appellant the relief sought at first instance and, accordingly:

—

Annul the decision of the European Commission, as the authority empowered to conclude contracts, of 4 October 2012, not to recruit the appellant as an auxiliary member of the contractual staff in function group II;

| — | In so far as necessary, annul the decision of the authority empowered to conclude contracts of 7 February 2013 rejecting the claim brought by the appellant on 19 October 2012; |
| --- | --- |

—

In so far as necessary, annul the decision of the authority empowered to conclude contracts of 7 February 2013 rejecting the claim brought by the appellant on 19 October 2012;

| — | Compensate his material losses; |
| --- | --- |

—

Compensate his material losses;

| — | Award him the sum fixed ex aequo et bono and provisionally at EUR 50  000 in respect of the non-material harm suffered; |
| --- | --- |

—

Award him the sum fixed ex aequo et bono and provisionally at EUR 50  000 in respect of the non-material harm suffered;

ex aequo et bono

| — | Order the defendant to pay all the costs, including those of the present appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay all the costs, including those of the present appeal.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the appeal, the appellant relies on three pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging infringement of the limits of the judicial review of the Civil Service Tribunal (CST) since it substituted its own assessment for that of the administration. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging infringement of the limits of the judicial review of the Civil Service Tribunal (CST) since it substituted its own assessment for that of the administration.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging an error of law, since the CST considered wrongly that, under Article 3(2) of Annex IV to the General Implementing Provisions of 2 March 2011 (1), professional experience must be properly circumstantiated and be related to one of the Commission’s areas of activity. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging an error of law, since the CST considered wrongly that, under Article 3(2) of Annex IV to the General Implementing Provisions of 2 March 2011 (1), professional experience must be properly circumstantiated and be related to one of the Commission’s areas of activity.

1

| 3. | Third plea in law, alleging a distortion of the facts of the case, since the CST stated, in the judgment under appeal, that the appellant had not supplied a description of the tasks carried out for Continental Airlines Inc. and, accordingly, had not proved that his experience was ‘appropriate’ to the carrying out of secretarial duties. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Third plea in law, alleging a distortion of the facts of the case, since the CST stated, in the judgment under appeal, that the appellant had not supplied a description of the tasks carried out for Continental Airlines Inc. and, accordingly, had not proved that his experience was ‘appropriate’ to the carrying out of secretarial duties.

---

(1)  General Provisions of 2 March 2011 for implementing Article 79(2) of the CEOS, governing the conditions of employment of contract staff employed by the Commission under the terms of Articles 3a and 3b of the said Conditions, published in Administrative Notices No 33-2011.

1

---