Case T-441/04: Action brought on 2 November 2004 by Jean-Claude Heyraud against the Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2005-01-08
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, European official, action by staff, personnel administration, promotion, regulations for civil servants, staff assessment

8.1.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 6/45

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Pleas in law and main arguments

— annul the decision of the Council refusing to grant to the
applicant the expatriation allowance and resulting rights,
from her entry into service on 1 September 2003;

— order the Council to pay the costs.

The applicant in this case, an official in Grade A4, objects to
the Appointing Authority's refusal
to promote him to the
higher grade in the second round of the 2003 promotion
procedure.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Before entering into the Council's service, the applicant worked
in the information office of the Land Baden-Würtemberg in
In the present action she challenges the decision
Brussels.
refusing to grant her the expatriation allowance.

In support of her action, the applicant pleads breach of Article
4(1)(a) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations in that the Council
did not consider that she was in circumstances arising from
work done for another State. The applicant also pleads breach
of the principle of equal treatment and of non-discrimination.

Action brought on 2 November 2004 by Jean-Claude
Heyraud against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities

(Case T-441/04)

(2005/C 6/88)

(Language of the case: French)

An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 2 November 2004, by Jean-Claude
Heyraud, residing in Brussels, represented by S. Orlandi, A.
Cooolen, J.-N. Louis and E. Marchal, lawyers, with an address
for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

In support of his claims, he pleads infringement of Article 45
of the Staff Regulations and breach of the principle of non-
discrimination.

He states, in that regard, that the Commission ‘standardised’ the
merit points awarded by the Directorates-General and Services
to officials in middle management in Grade A4 eligible for
promotion, for the purposes of considering their comparative
merits as prescribed by the Staff Regulations. The standardised
mark is fixed in relation to the average merit points awarded to
the officials in Grade A4 eligible for promotion to Grade A3 in
the second round.

The method used by the Commission is relevant only provided
that
the average is calculated on the basis of a sufficient
number of eligible officials. Since he was the only official in
Grade A4 in his Service eligible for promotion in the second
round of the 2003 procedure, the applicant was awarded a
standardised mark of 100 regardless of his merits and the
specific criteria used by his Service to fix merit points.

Action brought on 5 November 2004 by Andrea Walder-
dorff against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities

(Case T-442/04)

(2005/C 6/89)

(Language of the case: French)

— Annul the Commission's decision establishing the list of
officials promoted to Grade A3 in the second round of the
2003 promotion procedure, and rejecting the applicant's
candidature;

— Order the Commission to pay the costs.

An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 5 November 2004, by Andrea
Walderdorff, residing in Brussels, represented by L. Vogel,
lawyer.