Case T-115/05: Action brought on 28 February 2005 by José Jiménez Martinez against the Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2005-05-14
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, European official, action by staff, disability insurance, regulations for civil servants

14.5.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 115/33

— annul

the decision of

the appointing authority of 23
November 2004 rejecting the complaint
lodged under
Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations against the decision
the decision to
rejecting his candidature and against
appoint another candidate to the post;

— order compensation to be paid for the non-material damage
suffered, assessed on an equitable basis at EUR 5 000 by
way of damages, without prejudice to its increase or reduc-
tion in the course of proceedings;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of his application the applicant relies on a plea of
failure to state reasons for the contested decision in breach of
Article 25 of the Staff Regulations. He also raises pleas of
breach of the notice of vacancy, of Article 29(1) and Article 45
of the Staff Regulations, of the principles of equal treatment
and of the right to career advancement and a manifest error of
assessment, on the ground that his professional experience, his
responsibilities and his management and negotiating skills were
superior to those of the candidate selected. Finally the applicant
alleges misuse of powers.

Action brought on 28 February 2005 by Joerg Peter Block
the European
and Others against

the Commission of
Communities

(Case T-114/05)

(2005/C 115/59)

(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 28 February 2005 by Joerg Peter
Block, residing in Sterrebeek (Belgium), and 12 others, repre-
sented by Stéphane Rodrigues and Alice Jaune, lawyers.

The applicants claim that the Court should:

— annul the decisions of the appointing authority rejecting
the complaints of the applicants taken at the same time as
the decisions of the appointing authority of 1 May 2004
altering the applicants' grades to Grade A*8 or Grade B*8
as the case may be;

— annul the salary statements of the applicants implementing
the decision of the appointing authority to alter the appli-

cants' grades to Grade A*8 or Grade B*8 as the case may
be, from 1 May 2004;

— inform the appointing authority of the effects of the annul-
ment of
the
the contested decisions namely,
reclassification of the applicants' grades to Grade A*9 or
Grade B*9, as the case may be, with retroactive effect from
1 May 2004;

inter alia,

— in the alternative, order the Commission to recognise that
the applicants are eligible for promotion to Grade A*10 or
Grade B*10, as the case may be, when they are next
promoted;

— order the Commission to make good the damage suffered
by the applicants as a result of their not being classified in
Grade A*9 or Grade B*9, as the case may be, from 1 May
2004;

— order the defendant to bear the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicants are all officials of the Commission who were
appointed at Grade A7 and B2 before the entry into force of
the new Staff Regulations on 1 May 2004. They contest their
classification in Grade A*8 and B*8 respectively pursuant to
Article 2 of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations.

In support of their application the applicants submit that the
application to them of that provision is unlawful, as it breaches
Article 6 of the Staff Regulations, the principles of equivalence
of the old and new career structures and of equal treatment, as
well as the applicants' legitimate expectations and established
rights. The applicants also allege misuse of powers.

Action brought on 28 February 2005 by José Jiménez
the European
Martinez against

the Commission of

Communities

(Case T-115/05)

(2005/C 115/60)

(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 28 February 2005 by José Jiménez
Martinez, residing in Brussels, represented by Eric Boigelot,
lawyer.

C 115/34

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

14.5.2005

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— breach of the principle of good administration and sound
management and breach of the duty to have regard for the
welfare of officials.

1. annul the Invalidity Committee's decision of 21 April 2004
refusing the applicant's request of 19 January 2004 to be
declared invalid, notified by memo of 27 April 2004,

2. annul the Invalidity Committee's decision of 22 July 2004
granting a declaration of invalidity, in so far as the effect of
the declaration of invalidity is not retroactive to 21 April
2004,

Action brought on 28 February 2005 by Dorian Lacombe
against the Council of the European Union

3. grant the applicant compensation for material and non-
at
the

assessed on an equitable basis
to increase in the course of

material damage
EUR 222 568, subject
proceedings,

4. order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

(Case T-116/05)

(2005/C 115/61)

(Language of the case: French)

The applicant in this case objects to the defendant's decision to
invalidity for three years from 1
grant his declaration of
September 2004 without providing for retroactive effect to 21
April 2004, the date on which the Invalidity Committee took
an initial adverse decision in regard to him.

In support of his claims, the applicant pleads:

— infringement of Article 7 of Annex II to the Staff Regula-
tions and of the rules relating to the operation of the Inva-
lidity Committee. He maintains in that regard that two of
the three doctors comprising the Invalidity Committee had
no knowledge either of his illness or of his state of health,

— in this case, the Committee made a manifest error of assess-
ment regarding the nature of his illness. It is stated in that
regard that the Invalidity Committee took no account what-
soever of the existence of an illness different from sleeping
disorders, namely the chronic fatigue previously diagnosed,

— failure to comply with the obligation to state reasons,

An action against the Council of the European Union was
brought before the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities on 28 February 2005 by Dorian Lacombe,
residing in Evry (France), represented by Sébastien Orlandi,
Xavier Martin, Albert Coolen,
Jean-Noël Louis and Etienne
Marchal, lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

1. order the Council to pay to the applicant an amount corre-
sponding to the total amount of overtime worked in accord-
ance with the statement signed for agreement by his
immediate superior and by the Secretary-General of the
Council, less the amount already paid,

2. order the Council to pay to the applicant's social security
scheme the employer's contributions provided for by the
legislation in force,

3. order the Council to pay to the applicant the unemployment
benefits to which he would have been entitled if
the
employer's contributions had been paid in due time to his
social security scheme,

— infringement of Articles 53 and 78 of the Staff Regulations
and of Articles 13 to 18 of Annex VIII to those regulations,

4. order the defendant to pay to the applicant default interest
calculated at the ECB central rate plus 2 points on all sums
which should have been paid under the auxiliary staff
contract between the parties.