Order — ECLI:EU:T:2009:375
Date: 2009-09-30
Language of the case: French
Court formation: Third Chamber
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: General provisions
Concepts: Independent nature of the action for damages;General;Basis of liability
Procedure: Action for damages
Origin: France

Action brought on 6 May 2008 - Ivanov v Commission (Case T-166/08) Language of the case: French Parties Applicant: Vladimir Ivanov (Boulogne Billancourt, France) (represented by: F. Rollinger, lawyer) Defendant: Commission of the European Communities Form of order sought Declare that the Commission is liable for infringement of the principles of transparency, proper administration, non-discrimination and equal treatment in connection with the recruitment procedure which took place following the vacancy notice for a post as a 'Pre-enlargement Adviser and Political Rapporteur' based in Sofia, in May 2003; Order the Commission to make good, on the basis of the second paragraph of Article 288 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, the damage which it caused to the applicant; Accordingly, order the Commission to pay to the applicant the amount of EUR 180 000 as damages for the loss sustained; Order the Commission to pay the amount of EUR 10 000 in respect of non-material damage sustained by the applicant; Order the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs and expenses. Pleas in law and main arguments In 2003, the applicant applied for a local member of staff's post as a 'Pre-enlargement Adviser' in Sofia. His application was rejected at the preliminary selection stage on account of his dual Franco-Bulgarian nationality as only candidates who had the nationality of a Member State were eligible for the vacant post. During the recruitment procedure and after the rejection of his application, the applicant unsuccessfully requested more information regarding the procedure and the reasons for the rejection of his application. He then brought the matter before the European Ombudsman, who concluded that there had been maladministration and infringement of the principle of non-discrimination or of equal treatment on the part of the Commission. By the present action, the applicant requests that the Court of First Instance declare that the Commission is non-contractually liable for infringement of the principles of transparency, proper administration, non-discrimination and equal treatment in connection with the recruitment procedure in question. ____________