Case T-387/05: Action brought on  13 October 2005  — Chatziioannidou v Commission
Date: 2006-01-14
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, Greece, action by staff, equal treatment, euro, exchange rate, transfer of pension rights

14.1.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 10/25

Action brought on 10 October 2005 — Wilms v Commis-
sion

Action brought on 13 October 2005 — Chatziioannidou v
Commission

(Case T-386/05)

(2006/C 10/49)

Language of the case: French

(Case T-387/05)

(2006/C 10/50)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Günter Wilms (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: M.
van der Woude and V. Landes, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Parties

Applicant: Eleni Chatziioannidou (Auderghem, Belgium) (repre-
sented by: S.A. Pappas, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the formal proposal of the Director General of the
Legal Service to award the applicant
two Directorate-
General priority points for the 2004 promotion exercise,
which was confirmed and made definitive by the decision
of the Director General rejecting his internal appeal;

— annul the decision of the Director General of Personnel and
Administration not
‘Promotion
Committee for additional activity in the interests of the
institution’
(‘PPCP’) special priority points for the 2004
promotion exercise;

to award him any

— annul the decisions of the Director General of Personnel
and Administration to award him a total of 17 points for
the 2004 promotion exercise and a total of 36 points for
the purpose of promotion to Grade A5 during that exercise;
the list of officials who were awarded PPCPs; the merit list
of Grade A6 officials for the 2004 promotion exercise after
Promotion Committees; the list of officials promoted to
Grade A5 for the 2004 promotion exercise and,
in any
event, the decision not to enter his name in those lists

— annul, so far as may be necessary, the decision rejecting his

complaint;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of his action, the applicant advances similar pleas to
those advanced in Case T-311/04 (1).

(1) OJ C 262, 23.10.2004, p. 44

— annul

the decision of 8 July 2005 of

the Appointing
Authority rejecting the complaint brought by the applicant
against a decision regarding the transfer of her pension
rights to the Community scheme;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

the Commission,

The applicant, an official of the Commission, applied for the
transfer of her pension rights, acquired in Greece before she
took up her post at
to the Community
scheme. By her action, she criticises the method of calculation
of the number of annuities to be taken into account according
to the Community pension scheme, on the basis of the capital
sum transferred. Specifically, the applicant submits that, before
the introduction of the euro, the Commission converted the
capital sum transferred in a currency other than the Belgian
Franc not on the basis of the rate applicable on the date of
calculation but at an average exchange rate which was intended
to reflect the currency fluctuations over the period of payment
of the contributions. However, following the transitional period
for the definitive introduction of the euro, that is to say from 1
January 2002, the Commission no longer uses that method of
calculation but takes into account the amount in euro trans-
ferred by the national funds.

The applicant states that the discontinuation of the average
in her case, to a considerable
exchange rate method leads,
reduction in the number of annuities with which she was cred-
ited. On that basis, she claims breach of Council Regulation No
1103/97, which provides that the introduction of the euro is
not to have the effect of altering any term of a legal instrument.
She also claims breach of the principle of non-discrimination,
since, depending on whether the transfer request was made
before or after the introduction of the euro, officials in exactly
the same position are not awarded the same number of annu-
ities under the Community scheme.