# C_2005281EN.01002302.xml

| 12.11.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 281/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.11.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 281/23

---

Action brought on 10 August 2005 — Arko and Others v Commission

(Case T-314/05)

(2005/C 281/44)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant(s): Eva Arko (Brussels, Belgium) and 28 others (represented by: S Rodrigues and A. Jaume, lawyers)

Applicant(s)

Defendant(s): Commission of the European Communities

Defendant(s)

The applicants claim that the Court should

Primarily:

| — | annul the decisions of appointment taken by the defendants in that they determine the applicants' grade under Article 12(3) of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations and their step under the provisions in force since the 1 May 2004; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decisions of appointment taken by the defendants in that they determine the applicants' grade under Article 12(3) of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations and their step under the provisions in force since the 1 May 2004;

| — | state to the defendants what the effect is of the annulment of the contested decisions and, in particular, of the reclassification of the applicants in accordance with the table of equivalence in Article 2(1) of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations, with retroactive effect from the dates on which the decisions to appoint the applicants took effect; |
| --- | --- |

—

state to the defendants what the effect is of the annulment of the contested decisions and, in particular, of the reclassification of the applicants in accordance with the table of equivalence in Article 2(1) of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations, with retroactive effect from the dates on which the decisions to appoint the applicants took effect;

In the alternative:

| — | order the Commission to make reparation for the damage the applicants suffered as a result of the fact that they were not classified under Article 2(1) of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations, from the dates on which the decisions to appoint the applicants took effect. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to make reparation for the damage the applicants suffered as a result of the fact that they were not classified under Article 2(1) of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations, from the dates on which the decisions to appoint the applicants took effect.

In any event:

| — | order the defendants to pay all the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendants to pay all the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicants, Commission officials, are successful candidates of a competition which took place before the amendments to the Staff Regulations entered into force on 1 May 2004. Recruited after that date, they were appointed to the grade and step prescribed in the new Staff Regulations, which they consider to be less advantageous. By this action, they dispute their appointments.

They submit that Article 12 of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations is inapplicable in the present case and, in the alternative, that that provision is unlawful and in breach of a number of principles of Community law. In that respect, they refer, firstly, to the principles of non-discrimination, equal treatment and freedom of movement for workers. The applicants submit that these principles have been infringed because the majority of the officials affected are nationals of the new Member States. They also submit that they have been discriminated against in comparison with officials included on the same list of suitable candidates and appointed prior to 1 May 2004.

In the same context, the applicants plead the alleged infringement of Article 31 of the Staff Regulations, which provides that new officials are to be nominated to the grade and function group set out in the competition notice, the alleged infringement of the principles of protection of legitimate expectations, legal certainty, sound administration and proportionality, and the administration's duty to have regard for the interests of officials, and misuse of powers.

---