# C_2011226EN.01003202.xml

| 30.7.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 226/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.7.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 226/32

---

Action brought on 1 June 2011 — ZZ v Commission

(Case F-63/11)

2011/C 226/64

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: S. Rodrigues, A. Blot and C. Bernard-Glanz, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the implied decision not to renew the applicant’s temporary staff contract

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the implied decision adopted on 12 August 2010 by the Director General of OLAF (European Anti-Fraud Office), in his capacity as the authority authorised to conclude contracts of employment, not to renew the applicant’s contract, as is apparent, inter alia, from the lack of reply to the request sent to him by the applicant on 12 April 2011; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the implied decision adopted on 12 August 2010 by the Director General of OLAF (European Anti-Fraud Office), in his capacity as the authority authorised to conclude contracts of employment, not to renew the applicant’s contract, as is apparent, inter alia, from the lack of reply to the request sent to him by the applicant on 12 April 2011;

| — | In so far as necessary, annul the decision adopted on 22 February 2011 by the authority authorised to conclude contracts of employment rejecting the claim brought by the applicant on the basis of Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations; |
| --- | --- |

—

In so far as necessary, annul the decision adopted on 22 February 2011 by the authority authorised to conclude contracts of employment rejecting the claim brought by the applicant on the basis of Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations;

| — | In consequence, reinstate the applicant in the functions which he performed within OLAF, in the context of a prolongation of his contract in accordance with the statutory requirements; |
| --- | --- |

—

In consequence, reinstate the applicant in the functions which he performed within OLAF, in the context of a prolongation of his contract in accordance with the statutory requirements;

| — | In the alternative, and in the event that the claim for reinstatement made above should not be upheld, order the defendant to compensate the applicant for the material damage suffered, provisionally estimated ex aequo et bono at the difference in the remuneration which he received as a temporary staff member in OLAF and that which he receives in his present post (that is to say, around EUR 3 000 per month), at the very least for a length of time similar to that of his initial contract (four years) and beyond that period on the basis that that contract would have been renewed for a third time, entitling him to a contract of employment for an indefinite period; |
| --- | --- |

—

In the alternative, and in the event that the claim for reinstatement made above should not be upheld, order the defendant to compensate the applicant for the material damage suffered, provisionally estimated ex aequo et bono at the difference in the remuneration which he received as a temporary staff member in OLAF and that which he receives in his present post (that is to say, around EUR 3 000 per month), at the very least for a length of time similar to that of his initial contract (four years) and beyond that period on the basis that that contract would have been renewed for a third time, entitling him to a contract of employment for an indefinite period;

ex aequo et bono

| — | In any event, order the defendant to pay a provisional ex aequo et bono sum of EUR 5 000 in compensation for the non-material damage, together with late-payment interest at the legal rate from the date of the judgment; |
| --- | --- |

—

In any event, order the defendant to pay a provisional ex aequo et bono sum of EUR 5 000 in compensation for the non-material damage, together with late-payment interest at the legal rate from the date of the judgment;

ex aequo et bono

| — | Order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Commission to pay the costs.

---