Case T-201/05: Action brought on 18 May 2005 by José María Perez Santander against Council of the European Union
Date: 2005-08-06
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: Council of the European Union, European official, action by staff, competition (EU), indemnification, personnel administration, professional career, recruitment, regulations for civil servants

C 193/32

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

6.8.2005

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Pleas in law and main arguments

1. annul the reporting for the year 2003 so far as it concerns

the applicant;

2. alternatively, annul her Career Development Report for the

period 1.1.2003 (cid:1) 31.12.2003;

3. order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant relies on the same pleas as those on which she
already relies in Case T-97/04 (1) relating to her Career Devel-
opment Report for the period 2001(cid:2)2002.

(1) OJ C 106, 30.4.2004, p. 82.

Action brought on 12 May 2005 by Michael Cwik against
the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-200/05)

(2005/C 193/54)

(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 12 May 2005 by Michael Cwik,
residing in Tervuren (Belgium), represented by Nicolas Lhoºst,
lawyer, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

1. annul the decision of the Director General of DG ECFIN of
25 June 2004 confirming, without amendment, the appli-
cant’s Career Development Report
for the period
(CDR)
from 1 January 2003 to 31 December 2003;

2. annul, in so far as it is necessary, the Commission’s decision
of 24 January 2005 rejecting the applicant’s claim (R/970/
04);

3. order the defendant to pay symbolic damages of EUR 1;

4. order the defendant to pay all the costs.

The pleas and main arguments relied on by the applicant with
regard to the new evaluation system for officials are similar to
those relied on in Case T-96/04.
In addition, the applicant
submits that that new system leads to an abuse of power to the
extent that the number of merit points granted is influenced by
expected promotions. Finally,
the
the applicant alleges that
disputed report is vitiated by manifest errors of assessment.

Action brought on 18 May 2005 by JosØ Mar(cid:1)a Perez
Santander against Council of the European Union

(Case T-201/05)

(2005/C 193/55)

(Language of the case: French)

An action against the Council of the European Union was
brought before the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities on 18 May 2005 by JosØ Mar(cid:3)a Perez Santander,
residing in Ixelles (Belgium), represented by G. Vandersanden
and L. Levi, lawyers.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

(cid:1) annual the classification in grade granted to the applicant in
his recruitment decision, in so far as that classification is
based on Article 12(3) of Annex XIII to the new Staff Regu-
lations;

(cid:1) in

the

applicant’s

reconstitute

consequence,

career
(including recognition of his experience in the grade thus
amended, his rights to promotion and his pension entitle-
ment), on the basis of the grade in which he should have
competition notice
been appointed as
stated in the
following which he was placed on the reserve list
for
recruitment, either in the grade appearing in that competi-
tion notice, or, corresponding to its equivalent according to
the classification in the new Staff Regulations (and the
appropriate step in accordance with the rules applicable
before 1 May 2004), on the basis of the decision appointing
him;

6.8.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 193/33

(cid:1) award the applicant default

interest based on the rate
applied by the European Central Bank for its main refinan-
cing operation, during the period concerned, plus 2 points,
on all the sums corresponding to the difference between
the salary corresponding to his classification in his recruit-
ment decision and the classification to which he should
have been entitled up to the date of the decision properly
classifying him in grade;

(cid:1) order the defendant to pay all the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are identical to those
invoked in Case T-58/95, Centeno Mediavilla and Others v
Commission (1).

(1) OJ C 93 of 16.4.2005, p. 38.

Action brought on 18 May 2005 by Caroline Ogou against
Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-202/05)

(cid:1) annul the decision of the (cid:4)Internal Competition Task Force(cid:5),
which was notified to her by an electronic message of 12
May 2004, rejecting the application, delivery of which she
had procured on the same day by another method;

(cid:1) annul

the subsequent
procedure, in particular;

formal steps in the competition

(cid:1) the list of candidates who meet the requirements of
Article 28(a),
the Staff Regulations,
adopted by the Appointing Authority and transmitted
to the Selection Board with the applicants’ files;

(b) and (c) of

(cid:1) the list, adopted by the Selection Board, of candidates
who satisfy the requirements of the competition notice;

(cid:1) the list of suitable candidates adopted by the Selection

Board at the conclusion of its work;

(cid:1) and the decisions of appointment which were or will be
adopted by the Appointing Authority on that basis;

(cid:1) annul, if necessary, the decision of 3 February 2005 of the
Director-General of Personnel and Administration rejecting
her complaint of 12 August 2004 against the preceding
contested acts,

(cid:1) order the Commission to pay the costs.

(2005/C 193/56)

Pleas in law and main arguments

(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 18 May 2005 by Caroline Ogou,
resident in Abidjan (Ivory Coast), represented by M.-A. Lucas,
lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

(cid:1) annul the notice of competition COM/PB/04 of 6 April
2004 and the instructions relating to the electronic entry
procedure to which it refers, or at least Paragraph IX.1 of
the notice;

(cid:1) declare illegal

the exclusion of her candidature which
resulted from the impossibility with which she was
confronted, on 12 May 2004, of obtaining access to the
electronic entry form by following the procedure prescribed
by the competition notice;

The applicant, a member of the local staff of the Commission,
was faced with the impossibility of entering electronically
internal competition COM/PB/04 to pass from category C to
category B, in accordance with the competition notice, since
the Commission had configured the computer system for
entering in such away as to obstruct the candidature of local
staff.

The applicant claims that Paragraph III.1 of the competition
notice, which provides that officials and temporary staff are
eligible and which therefore excludes local staff, is contrary to
Articles 4, 27 and 29(1)(b) of the Staff Regulations, as well as
to the principle of equal treatment. The obstacle to her entry
(cid:4)on line(cid:5) is, as a result, illegal. The applicant maintains in that
regard that local staff who are in the service of the institution
because of a connection under public law, form part of the
internal or statutory staff and have, as a rule, the right of access
to internal competitions, that they are entrusted with tasks
equivalent to those of officials or temporary staff, and that their
exclusion from internal competitions is therefore neither justi-
fied by the requirements of the posts to be filled nor compa-
tible with the interests of the service.