ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 96/27

Action brought on 30 January 2015 — ZZ and Others v Commission

(Case F-16/15)

(2015/C 096/35)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: ZZ and Others (represented by: T. Bontinck and A. Guillerme, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decisions to change the description of the type of post held by the applicants in the Sysper 2 application and not to include them in the list of officials proposed for promotion to grade AST 10 in the context of the promotion round for 2014.

Form of order sought

The applicants claim, primarily, that the Tribunal should:

— declare Article 45 of the Staff Regulations, Annex I thereto and the corresponding transitional measures to be unlawful;

— annul the decision of the appointing authority of 14 April 2014 to amend the applicants’ promotion files in the ‘Sysper 2’ system in order to block any possibility of their promotion;

— annul the subsequent decision of the appointing authority, notified on 24 June 2014, not to include the applicants in the list of officials proposed for promotion to grade AST 10 in the context of the annual promotion round for 2014 provided for in Article 45 of the Staff Regulations;

— order the Commission to pay the costs.

In the alternative, the applicants claim that the Tribunal should:

— annul the decision of the appointing authority of 14 April 2014 to amend the applicants’ promotion files contained in the ‘Sysper 2’ system in order to block any possibility of their promotion;

— annul the subsequent decision of the appointing authority, notified on 24 June 2014, not to include the applicants in the list of officials proposed for promotion to grade AST 10 in the context of the annual promotion round for 2014 provided for in Article 45 of the Staff Regulations;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 89/48

Action brought on 23 January 2015 — ZZ and Others v Commission

(Case F-10/15)

(2015/C 089/59)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: ZZ and Others (represented by: J.-N. Louis, R. Metz, N. de Montigny, D. Verbeke and T. Van Lysebeth, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of decisions establishing the rights of the applicants with regard to reimbursement of their annual travel expenses pursuant to Article 8 of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations, as amended by Regulation No 1023/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 amending the Staff Regulations of Officials and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Union.

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Tribunal should:

— Annul the applicants’ pay slips for June 2014 in so far as they apply, for the first time, the version of Article 8 of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations in force since 1 January 2014 for the purposes of determining the reimbursement of their travel expenses;

— Annul, if necessary, the standard decisions of 15 October 2014 rejecting their claim;
—

Annul the decision of CEPOL No 17/2014/DIR dated 23 May 2014, providing for the relocation of CEPOL in Budapest, Hungary, as from 1 October 2014 and informing the applicants that ‘Non-compliance with this instruction will be considered as resignation with the effect of 30 September 2014’;
—

Order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings, pursuant to Article 87 of the Rules of Procedure of the Civil Service Tribunal.
—

Annul the decision of 7 January 2015 rejecting the applicant’s complaint of 12 September 2014, if necessary, and in any event, in the still further alternative, in so far as it refuses to reduce the monthly amounts deducted pursuant to Article 85 of the Statute;
—

Annul the decision of 9 December 2014, notified on 16 December 2014, but only in so far as the Appointing Authority, after having upheld the claim in this regard and correctly decided to annul the decision of 19 June 2014 and therefore to grant her the dependent child allowance and the derived allowances, decided none the less not to grant the allowances in question retroactively from the date of her marriage, awarding the right to the dependent child allowance and the derived allowances only with effect from 1 March 2014, namely the first day of the month during which the applicant applied for review;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 279/59

Action brought on 26 May 2015 — ZZ v EIB

(Case F-82/15)

(2015/C 279/75)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: L. Isola and G. Isola, lawyers)

Defendant: European Investment Bank

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

The annulment, first, of the decision not to reimburse the expenses incurred by the applicant for laser treatment undergone in 2007 and, secondly, of the consecutive and connected decisions taken by the bank in 2014.

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Tribunal should:

— annul the decision notified on 4 December 2014 and all measures connected, consecutive or prior to it, which certainly include the letters of the EIB of 8 January 2014, 31 January 2014, 14 February 2014, 24 February 2014, 30 April 2014 and 3 July 2014, and the opinion of 26 February 2008 of Dr M., the bank’s medical officer and the report he issued in October 2008 and, lastly, the opinion issued by Dr S. on 6 October 2014;

— order the EIB to reimburse the sum of EUR 3 000, corresponding to the sum spent by the applicant to undergo laser treatment performed on 29 and 31 October 2007 and 21 and 23 November 2007, and to pay compensation assessed on equitable grounds for the material and non-material harm incurred, together with interest and an amount to offset inflation on the sums granted;

— in the alternative, order the European Union to pay EUR 3 000 by way of compensation for the damage incurred by the applicant because of its ambiguous provisions, together with interest and an amount to offset inflation;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 221/29

Action brought on 23 April 2015 — ZZ v OHIM

(Case F-65/15)

(2015/C 221/40)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: H. Tettenborn, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Action for annulment of the defendant’s decision of 4 June 2014 to terminate the applicant’s contract of employment pursuant to a clause in that contract of employment.

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Tribunal should:

— set aside the determination of OHIM, which was communicated by letter from OHIM dated 4 June 2014, to terminate the applicant’s contract as a temporary member of staff at OHIM with a notice period of six months, which began upon expiry of the validity of the reserve list of competition EPSO OHIM/AST/02/13;

— order OHIM to pay to the applicant damages of an appropriate amount at the discretion of the Tribunal for the non-material damage arising from the decision of OHIM referred to in paragraph 1 above;

— in the event that the date of the judgment or the definitive conclusion of the present proceedings is after the termination of the applicant’s contract of employment by OHIM: order OHIM to reinstate the applicant with full restoration of her career advancements which she would have achieved upon continuous further employment and order OHIM to compensate the applicant fully for the material damage suffered by her, in particular by paying all outstanding salary and all other material damage incurred by the applicant as a result of OHIM’s unlawful conduct (after deduction of unemployment benefit received);

— in the alternative, in the event that, in the present situation, for legal or practical reasons the applicant is not reinstated or re-employed under the same conditions as hitherto, order OHIM to pay the applicant compensation for the material damage caused to the applicant by the unlawful termination of her employment, corresponding to the difference between her actual lifetime earnings and the lifetime earnings the applicant would have achieved if the contract had remained in force, taking into account pension benefits and other entitlements;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 320/54

Action brought on 27 July 2015 — ZZ and ZZ v Commission

(Case F-108/15)

(2015/C 320/75)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: ZZ and ZZ (represented by: N. de Montigny and J.N. Louis, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Application for annulment of the Commission’s decision to limit to five years the period of retroactive recalculation of the flat-rate allowance for overtime to which the applicants are entitled.

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Tribunal should:

— annul the decision of 16 September 2014 of PMO. 1 to limit the payment of the adaptation of the flat-rate allowance for overtime to which the applicants have been entitled since 1 March 2007 and 1 March 2008 respectively, to five years from 1 September 2008, the date on which the PMO discovered the error in the calculation of their remuneration;

— order the Commission to pay the applicants the adaptation of the flat-rate allowance for overtime from 1 March 2007 and 1 March 2008 respectively, subject to the deduction of the sums already paid and together with default interest on the arrears of that allowance calculated from their deadline for payment until their actual payment at the rate fixed by the European Central Bank for its main refinancing operations increased by two points;
—

Annul the decision of 26 June 2014 by which the Commission grants an increase of 20 % of the compensation referred to in Article 14 of the Common rules on the insurance of officials of the Communities against the risk of accident and of occupational disease in the version applicable until 31 December 2006, on the ground of serious irregularities in the opinion given on 8 January 2014 by the medical committee, since it did not uphold in full the applicant’s requests and granted only 20 % in compensation, under Article 14 of the Common rules, in respect of harm to the cardio-respiratory function, without taking into account the mental harm and functional disruption of sleep due to the alteration of the left lateral decubitus position;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 406/46

Action brought on 19 October 2015 — ZZ v Commission

(Case F-91/15)

(2015/C 406/48)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: J.-N. Louis and N. de Montigny, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the Commission’s decision to apply the medical reservation clause in Article 32 of the CEOS, in so far as it does not give the applicant the invalidity allowance and compensation in respect of the non-material harm allegedly suffered.

Form of order sought

— Annul the decisions of the Commission of 16 September 2014 applying the medical reservation in Article 32 of the CEOS to the applicant and refusing to give him the invalidity allowance;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 328/36

Action brought on 29 July 2015 — ZZ v Commission

(Case F-110/15)

(2015/C 328/34)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: S. Orlandi and T. Martin, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Application seeking annulment of the proposal to transfer the applicant’s pension rights into the EU pension scheme, which applies the new general provisions implementing Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations, and an order for the defendant to pay a provisional sum of one euro against the damage allegedly suffered.

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Tribunal should:

— declare that Article 9 of the general provisions of 15 July 2011 implementing Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations is unlawful;

— annul the decision of 10 March 2015 to credit the pension rights acquired by the applicant prior to his entry into service, in the context of the transfer of those rights into the pension scheme of the EU institutions, pursuant to the general provisions of 15 July 2011 implementing Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations;

— in the alternative, order the European Commission to pay a provisional sum of one euro against the damage suffered by the applicant;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 68/46

Action brought on 17 December 2015 — ZZ v Parliament

(Case F-147/15)

(2016/C 068/59)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: M. Casado García-Hirschfeld, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Application for annulment of the decision terminating the applicant’s contract.

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Tribunal should:

— annul the contested decision dated 24 February 2015;

— so far as necessary, annul the rejection decision dated 9 September 2015;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 7/38

Action brought on 29 October 2015 — ZZ v Parliament

(Case F-136/15)

(2016/C 007/51)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: C. Bernard-Glanz, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment, firstly, of the Parliament’s decision to put the applicant’s situation into order as regards the allocation of the education allowance and, secondly, of the decision to recover the amounts which the applicant unduly received in that regard.

Form of order sought

— Annul the contested decisions and, in so far as necessary, the decision rejecting the claim;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 251/52

Action brought on 18 May 2016 — ZZ v EEAS

(Case F-25/16)

(2016/C 251/61)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: N. de Montigny and J.-N. Louis, lawyers)

Defendant: European External Action Service (EEAS)

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Application for annulment of the decision of the appointing authority dated 7 July 2015 not to promote the applicant to grade AST 3 under the 2013 promotion procedure and an application for damages.

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Tribunal should:

— annul the decision of the appointing authority dated 7 July 2015 not to promote the applicant to grade AST 3 under the 2013 promotion procedure;

— order the EEAS to pay the applicant compensation of EUR 15 000;
—

Annul the defendant’s decision of 24/07/2015 not to promote the applicant to the next grade (AST 8) in the defendant’s 2015 promotion procedure by not including the name of the applicant on the list of officials promoted in the 2015 promotion exercise issued 24/07/2015;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 371/29

Action brought on 4 August 2016 — ZZ v Commission

(Case F-39/16)

(2016/C 371/31)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: M. Velardo, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision not to admit the applicant to the selection tests for competition EPSO/AD/309/15 (AD 11) — Doctors for the sites of Luxembourg and ISPRA and order for the defendant to pay damages and interest for the non-pecuniary harm allegedly suffered of an amount of EUR 10 000.

Form of order sought

— annul the decision of the jury for competition EPSO/AD/309/15 (AD 11) — Doctors for the sites of Luxembourg and Ispra (Field: Doctors Luxembourg), notified on 28 September 2015, not to admit the applicant to the selection tests held at the European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) assessment centre;

— order the defendant to pay an amount of EUR 10 000 for non-pecuniary harm suffered by the applicant;
—

Cancel the decision dated 16 October 2015 rendered in the framework of the Dignity at Work investigation procedure launched by the applicant dated 20 May 2015 against her supervisor, as investigated by the Investigation Panel and annulment of the Report by the Investigation Panel dated 14 September 2015 related to the Dignity at Work request filed by the applicant, in which her complaint has been rejected and inappropriate recommendations have been included, including a sanitization of the report;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 116/31

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 31 January 2008 — Valero Jordana v Commission

(Case F-104/05) (1)

(Staff cases - Officials - Promotion - 2004 promotion exercise - Award of priority points - Temporal application of provisions of the new Staff Regulations)

(2008/C 116/58)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Gregorio Valero Jordana (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: M. Merola and I. van Schendel, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: G. Berscheid and V. Joris, Agents, assisted by D. Slater, lawyer)

Re:

Annulment of the Commission's decision awarding priority points to the applicant under the 2004 promotion exercise and of the decision not to promote him to Grade A*12 under that exercise

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

1. Annuls the decision setting Mr Valero Jordana's total number of points at the end of the 2004 promotion exercise and the decision not to promote him under that exercise;

2. Dismisses the remainder of the action;

3. Orders the Commission of the European Communities to bear all the costs.

(1) OJ C 10, 14.1.2006, p. 27 (Case initially registered at the Court of First Instance of the European Communities under T-394/05 and transferred to the European Union Civil Service Tribunal by order of 15 December 2005).
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 138/21

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 29 September 2011 — Mische v Commission

(Case F-70/05) (1)

(Civil service - Appointment - Successful candidate in a competition published before the entry into force of the new Staff Regulations but finalised afterwards - Grading under new, less favourable rules)

2012/C 138/39

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Harald Mische (Brussels, Belgium) (represented: initially by G. Vandersanden and L. Levi, lawyers, and subsequently by R. Holland, B. Maluch and J. Mische, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and H. Krämer, Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Arpio Santacruz and M. Simm, Agents)

Re:

Annulment of the Commission’s decision classifying the applicant at grade A*6 following a competition published before the entry into force of the new Staff Regulations but finalised after that date, under the less favourable provisions of those regulations (Article 12 of Annex XIII to Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 723/2004 amending the Staff Regulations of Officials)

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders each party to bear its own costs;

3. Orders the Council of the European Union, the intervener, to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 229, 17.9.2005, p. 35 (case initially registered before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities under the Number T-288/05 and transferred to the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union by order of 15.12.2005).
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 328/59

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 30 September 2010 — Jacobs v Commission

(Case F-41/05) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Appointment - Candidates placed on a reserve list prior to the entry into force of the new Staff Regulations - Classification in grade under the new, less favourable rules - Article 12(3) of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations)

2010/C 328/93

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Kurt Jacobs (Bruges, Belgium) (represented by: L. Vogel, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: H. Krämer and K. Herrmann, acting as Agents)

Re:

First, annulment of the Commission’s decision classifying the applicant, who was placed on a reserve list prior to the entry into force of the new Staff Regulations, under the less favourable provisions of those regulations (Article 12 of Annex XIII to Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 723/2004 amending the Staff Regulations of Officials) and, second, an application for damages

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

1. Dismisses the application;

2. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 205, 20.8.2005, p. 26. (Case originally registered at the Court of First Instance of the European Communities as Case T-220/05 and transferred to the European Union Civil Service Tribunal by order of 15.12.2005.)
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 313/55

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 9 October 2008 — Nijs v Court of Auditors

(Case F-49/06) (1)

(Staff case - Officials - Promotion - 2005 promotion procedure)

(2008/C 313/97)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Bart Nijs (Bereldange, Luxembourg) (represented by: F. Rollinger, lawyer)

Defendant: Court of Auditors of the European Communities (represented by: T. Kennedy, J.-M. Stenier and G. Corstens, Agents)

Re:

First, annulment of the decision of the appointing authority not to promote the applicant to grade A*11 pursuant to the 2005 promotion procedure and, second, a claim for damages.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

1. Dismisses the action as partly inadmissible and partly unfounded;

2. Orders Mr Nijs to pay all the costs.

(1) OJ C 154, 1.7.2006, p. 26.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 128/38

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 8 April 2008 — Bordini v Commission

(Case F-134/06) (1)

(Staff cases - Officials - Pensions - Correction coefficient - Member State of residence - Concept of residence - Concept of principal residence - Documents in support)

(2008/C 128/80)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Giovanni Bordini (Dover, United Kingdom) (represented by: L. Levi, C. Ronzi and I. Perego, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: M.J. Currall and M.D. Martin, Agents)

Re:

Staff case — First, annulment of the Commission decision of 25 January 2006 failing to recognise that the applicant is resident in the United Kingdom and, in consequence, failing to apply to his pension the correction coefficient for that Member State and, second, a claim for damages

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the Commission of the European Communities to bear its own costs and to pay half of the costs which Mr Bordini incurred in respect of the informal meeting of 5 June 2007;

3. Save in respect of half of the costs which he incurred in respect of the informal meeting of 5 June 2007, orders Mr Bordini bear his own costs.

(1) OJ C 326, 30.12.2006, p. 87.