JUDGMENT OF THE CIVIL SERVICE TRIBUNAL
(Second Chamber)
24 September 2009
Case F-94/07
Jean Rebizant and Others
v
Commission of the European Communities
(Civil service – Officials – Promotion – 2006 procedure – Multiplier rate – Article 6(2) of the Staff Regulations – Article 9 of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations – Promotion threshold)
Application: brought under Articles 236 EC and 152 EA, in which Mr Rebizant, Mr Vlandas and Mr Vocino seek annulment of the Commission’s
decision not to promote them to grade AD 13 under the 2006 promotion procedure.
Held: The action is dismissed. Each party is ordered to bear its own costs.
Summary
Actions for annulment – Pleas in law – Invalid plea in law
In an action for annulment, where a plea, in the event that it is well founded, is not such as to lead to the annulment sought
by the applicant, that plea must be regarded as invalid. Therefore, where an official who is paid from the appropriations
of one of the parties under the general budget brings an action against a decision of the Commission not to promote him, even
though he could not have been promoted because he had not accumulated sufficient points for promotion, he must be regarded
as not having a legitimate interest in obtaining annulment of a decision which could only be taken again, in an identical
form, concerning him.
(see paras 61-62)
See:
C-46/98 P EFMA v Council [2000] ECR I‑7079, paras 37 and 38; C‑76/01 P Eurocoton and Others v Council [2003] ECR I‑10091, para. 52
T-432/04 Parlante v Commission [2007] ECR-SC I‑A‑2‑0000 and II‑A‑2‑0000, para. 38