Case T-208/05: Action brought on 30 May 2005 by Michael Brown against the Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2005-08-06
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, action by staff, competition (EU), equal treatment, regulations for civil servants, servant (EU)

C 193/36

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

6.8.2005

Action brought on 25 May 2005 by Gudrun Schulze
against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-207/05)

(2005/C 193/60)

(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 25 May 2005 by Gudrun Schulze,
residing in Brussels [(Belgium)], represented by Stéphane Rodri-
gues and Alice Jaume, lawyers.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

In support of her action, the applicant argues first that Article
12 of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations is inapplicable in her
case. According to the applicant, that article applies only to
officials on a list of suitable candidates. Successful candidates
on a recruitment reserve list cannot be regarded as officials.

the applicant argues that

that article is
In the alternative,
unlawful, being in breach, in her view, of the principle of equal
treatment for successful candidates of competitions published
before 1 May 2004, as well as of Article 5(5) of the Staff Regu-
lations. She also claims that her appointment to grade A*6
constitutes indirect discrimination on the ground of age as
against administrators appointed in that grade, in so far as her
long career is not given recognition. Furthermore, the applicant
considers that the principle of equal treatment for officials
performing the same functions is also infringed by the fact that
she has the same experience and performs the same functions
as other officials who are however in higher grades and receive
a higher salary.

1. annul the decision of the appointing authority rejecting the
applicant's complaint, in conjunction with the appointment
decision adopted by the appointing authority on 11
in so far as it determines her grade in
October 2004,
accordance with Article 12(3) of Annex XIII to the Staff
Regulations and her step in the grade pursuant
to the
current Article 32 of the Staff Regulations;

The applicant also pleads breach of Article 31 of the Staff
Regulations, of legitimate expectations, of legal certainty, of the
principle of good administration and of the duty to have regard
for the interests of officials. The applicant considers that the
contested decision also infringes her legitimate expectation of
being allowed additional seniority in accordance with Article
32 of the Staff Regulations, as applicable before 1 May 2004.

2. advise the appointing authority of the consequences of the
annulment of the contested decisions, in particular the re-
grading of the applicant to grade A*10, step 4 with retro-
spective effect from 16 June 2004, the date on which the
appointment decision of 11 October 2004 took effect;

3.

in the alternative, order the Commission to pay compensa-
tion for the damage suffered by the applicant as a result of
not being graded at grade A*10, step 4 with effect from 16
June 2004, the date on which the appointment decision of
11 October 2004 took effect;

Finally the applicant claims compensation for the material and
non-material damage she has suffered as a result of her
appointment to a lower grade.

4. order the defendant to pay the costs.

Action brought on 30 May 2005 by Michael Brown
against the Commission of the European Communities

Pleas in law and main arguments

Between March 2000 and December 2003, the applicant was
employed at the Commission as a temporary staff member,
initially at grade A4, then, from 1 January 2001, at grade A6.
From 1 January to 30 April 2004, the applicant was a member
of the auxiliary staff in group AI 04.

Having passed Open competition COM/A/3/02 for grade A7/
A6 administrators in the field of research, the applicant was
appointed an official by the contested decision of 11 October
2004. She was appointed to the post which she had previously
held as a temporary and auxiliary staff member. Under Article
12 of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations, the applicant was, on
recruitment, placed in the new grade A*6, which ranks below
the old A7/A6 grades which correspond to grades A*8/A*10
under the new system.

(Case T-208/05)

(2005/C 193/61)

(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 30 May 2005 by Michael Brown,
residing in Overijse (Belgium), represented by Lucas Vogel,
lawyer.

6.8.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 193/37

The applicant claims that the Court should:

1. annul the decision adopted by the Appointing Authority on
10 February 2005 (notified under cover of a note dated 14
February 2005, received on 25 February 2005), rejecting
the claim brought by the applicant on 16 September 2004
against the decision of 22 June 2004 adopted by the presi-
dent of the selection board of Competition COM/PB/04
refusing the applicant admission to that competition;

2.

in addition, in so far as it is necessary, annul the decision
adopted on 22 June 2004 by the president of the selection
board of Competition COM/PB/04 and the confirmation
thereof dated 19 July 2004;

European Communities on 30 May 2005 by the Italian
Republic, represented by Antonio Cingolo, Avvocato dello
Stato.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

1. annul the following memoranda [No 02772 of 21 March
2005 [POR Campania Region Ob 1 2000-2006 (No. CCI
1999 IT 16 1 PO 007)], No. 04534 of 13 May 2005
[Docup Ob 2 Lombardy Region 2000-2006 (No. CCI 2000
IT 16 2 DO 014)] and No 04537 of 13 May 2005 [Docup
Ob 2 Lombardy Region 2000-2006 (No CCI 2000 IT 16 2
DO 014)]] and all related and prior measures;

3. order the defendant to pay the costs.

2. order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The application of the applicant, an auxiliary agent at the
Commission, for admission to internal competition for change
of category COM/PB/04 was rejected on the ground that he
was not a temporary agent or an official at the closing date for
the lodging of applications.

The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as those
relied on in Case T-345/04 between the Italian Republic and
the Commission (1).

The applicant relies on two pleas, alleging

(1) OJ C 262 of 23.10.2004, p. 55.

— firstly, infringement of Articles 27 and 29(1) of the Staff
Regulations and a manifest error of assessment in that the
contested decisions and the notice of competition had the
effect of excluding candidates who could show that they
had particular skills and considerable professional experi-
ence within the Commission in favour of candidates who
were potentially less competent and who had less effective
seniority in the Commission's services, and

— secondly, infringement of the principle of non-discrimina-
tion in that employees the greater part of whose career had
been spent at the Commission as auxiliary agents would be
admitted to the competition on the sole ground that they
were temporary agents at the closing date for the lodging
of
a
the
temporary agent of long standing, was excluded on the sole
ground that he was an auxiliary agent on that date.

applications, whereas

applicant, who was

Action brought on 26 May 2005 by Jean-Luc Delplancke
and Matteo Governatori against the Commission of the
European Communities

(Case T-213/05)

(2005/C 193/63)

(Language of the case: French)

Action brought on 30 May 2005 by the Italian Republic
against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-212/05)

(2005/C 193/62)

An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 26 May 2005 by Jean-Luc
Delplancke, residing in Braine-le-Comte (Belgium), and Matteo
Governatori, residing in Saint-Josse-ten-Node (Belgium), repre-
sented by Sébastien Orlandi, Xavier Martin, Albert Coolen, Jean
Noël Louis and Etienne Marchal, lawyers, with an address for
service in Luxembourg.

(Language of the case: Italian)

The applicants claim that the Court should:

An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the

— annul the decisions to appoint the applicants officials of the
European Communities to the extent that they set their
recruitment grade pursuant to Article 12 of Annex XIII to
the Staff Regulations;