# C_2011186EN.01003501.xml

| 25.6.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 186/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.6.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 186/35

---

Action brought on 14 April 2011 — ZZ v EIB

(Case F-45/11)

2011/C 186/66

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: L. Isola, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Investment Bank

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the applicant’s staff report for the year 2009, in so far as it does not award him the mark A or B+ and in so far as it does not propose that he be promoted to Function D.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the measure, a copy of which was sent on 24 September 2010, in so far as the Appeals Committee, pursuant to Article 22 of the Staff Regulations and to its letter of 18 March 2010, rejected the applicant’s appeal against the staff report for 2009 on 22 September 2010; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the measure, a copy of which was sent on 24 September 2010, in so far as the Appeals Committee, pursuant to Article 22 of the Staff Regulations and to its letter of 18 March 2010, rejected the applicant’s appeal against the staff report for 2009 on 22 September 2010;

| — | annul the staff report for 2009, in so far as it relates to assessment, does not give the applicant the overall mark A or B+ and in so far as it does not propose that he be promoted to Function D; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the staff report for 2009, in so far as it relates to assessment, does not give the applicant the overall mark A or B+ and in so far as it does not propose that he be promoted to Function D;

| — | annul all related, consequent and prior measures, including both the guidelines laid down by the HR Directorate for summarising the appraisal by using one of the first letters of the alphabet and the promotions decided upon on 25 March 2010, given that, in the light of the view expressed by the applicant’s superiors that is challenged in the present action, the EIB failed to take him into consideration for the purpose of the heading ‘Promotions from Function E to D’; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul all related, consequent and prior measures, including both the guidelines laid down by the HR Directorate for summarising the appraisal by using one of the first letters of the alphabet and the promotions decided upon on 25 March 2010, given that, in the light of the view expressed by the applicant’s superiors that is challenged in the present action, the EIB failed to take him into consideration for the purpose of the heading ‘Promotions from Function E to D’;

| — | annul the letters of 17 and 30 November 2010, in which the President of the EIB, in the course of the conciliation procedure under Article 41 of the Staff Regulations, refused to allow the applicant to represent himself, and the letter of 20 January 2011, in which the HR Director-General refused to reimburse the costs incurred by the professional who represented him; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the letters of 17 and 30 November 2010, in which the President of the EIB, in the course of the conciliation procedure under Article 41 of the Staff Regulations, refused to allow the applicant to represent himself, and the letter of 20 January 2011, in which the HR Director-General refused to reimburse the costs incurred by the professional who represented him;

| — | order the EIB to pay compensation for material and non-material damage, to reimburse the lawyer’s fee paid to Gabriele Isola, and to pay the costs of the proceedings together with interest and monetary revaluation of the sums awarded. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the EIB to pay compensation for material and non-material damage, to reimburse the lawyer’s fee paid to Gabriele Isola, and to pay the costs of the proceedings together with interest and monetary revaluation of the sums awarded.

---