Case F-21/06: Action brought on  2 March 2006  — Da Silva v Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2006-05-06
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European Commission, European official, action by staff, appointment of staff, personnel administration, professional career

6.5.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 108/31

Action brought on 22 February 2006 — Patrizia de Luca v
Commission of the European Communities

(Case F-20/06)

(2006/C 108/57)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant(s): Patrizia de Luca (Brussels)
Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis and E. Marchal, lawyers,)

(represented by: S.

Defendant(s): Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

The applicant claim(s) that the Court should:

— declare that Article 12 of Annex XIII to the Staff Regula-

tions of Officials is unlawful;

— annul

the decision of

the appointing authority of 23
February 2005 appointing the applicant to an administra-
tor's post in the Directorate-General ‘Justice, Freedom and
Security’, Directorate ‘Civil Justice, Rights and Citizenship’,
Unit ‘Civil Justice’, inasmuch as it fixes her classification at
the taking effect of her
Grade A*9, step 2, and annul
seniority in step on 1 February 2005;

that competition or in competitions at the same level has been
fixed at different levels depending on whether recruitment took
place before or after Regulation No 723/2004 entered into
force. In the second place, when the applicant's seniority in
step was fixed no regard was had to the seniority that she had
acquired as a Grade A*10 official, contrary to the rules applic-
able, especially in relation to the appointment of a member of
the temporary staff as an official.

Finally, the applicant invokes the principle of the protection of
legitimate expectations,
inasmuch as she might expect to be
appointed to the grade indicated in the notice of competition.

(1) OJ L 124, 27 April 2004, p. 1.

Action brought on 2 March 2006 — Da Silva v Commis-
sion of the European Communities

(Case F-21/06)

(2006/C 108/58)

Language of the case: French

— order the Commission of the European Communities to

pay the costs.

Parties

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant, a Grade A6 official (subsequently A*10), was
appointed,
after Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No
723/2004 (1) of 22 March 2004 amending the Staff Regulations
of officials of the European Communities and the Conditions of
Employment of other servants of the European Communities
came into force, to an administrator's post, as a candidate
successful in Competition COM/A/11/01, the notice for which
had been published in 2001. Pursuant to Article 12 of Annex
XIII to the Staff Regulations, she was classified in Grade A*9.

First of all, the applicant claims that the contested decision
amounts to downgrading,
in disregard of the framework of
lawfulness constituted by the notice of competition in which
she was successful and also her reasonable career prospects. In
addition, she alleges breach of Articles 4, 5, 29 and 31 of the
Staff Regulations and also of the principles of good administra-
tion and proportionality.

According to the applicant, that decision is also contrary to the
principle of equal treatment and the principle of non-discrimi-
nation. In the first place, grading of candidates successful in

Applicant(s): João Da Silva (Brussels) (represented by: G. Vander-
sanden and L. Levi, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

— a declaration that the action is admissible and well founded,

including the plea of illegality that it contains;

— annulment of the applicant's classification in Grade A*14,
step 2, contained in the decision of 18 May 2005
appointing the applicant as a director;

— restoration of the applicant to the grade and step in which
he would in the ordinary course of events have been placed
(or the equivalent according to the classification introduced
by the new Staff Regulations), according to the provisions
of the notice of vacancy published on 7 November 2003,
pursuant to Article 29(2) of the Staff Regulations (notice
for a director's post at Grade A2);

C 108/32

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

6.5.2006

— complete reinstatement of the applicant's career with effect
retrospective to the date of his being classified in the grade
and step thus corrected, including the payment of default
interest;

— an order that the Commission of the European Commu-

nities should pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

On 7 November 2003 the Commission published a notice of
vacancy for a director's post at Grade A2, pursuant to Article
29(2) of the Staff Regulations. The applicant, a head of unit in
Grade 3, step 7, occupying that post as a locum tenens,
decided to apply for it.

By decision of 18 May 2005 he was appointed to the vacant
post and classified in Grade A*14, step 2, the date on which
that was to take effect being fixed at 16 September 2004.

In his action the applicant argues that this classification is
lower than Grade 2, now A*15, which appeared in the notice
of vacancy. What is more, the classification is also lower than
that enjoyed by the applicant before his appointment to the
director's post, while he was head of unit. That result is not
consistent with the fact that a director's post entails higher
duties and responsibilities.

The applicant considers that his classification is contrary to
Articles 2(1) and 5 of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations. More
than one legal principle has also been infringed: the principle
of non-discrimination, the principle of correspondence of grade
to post, set out in Article 7(1) as an essential principle guaran-
teeing equal
legal
certainty and protection of legitimate expectations, and the
principles of good administration and the duty to have regard
to the interests of officials. In addition, there is an infringement
of the right to reasonable career prospects and of the interests
of the service.

treatment of officials,

the principles of

In the alternative, the applicant claims that Article 12(3) of
Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations is unlawful.

Form of order sought

— annul the annul the explicit decision of 14 November 2005
whereby the European Parliament refused to afford the
applicants assistance under Article 24 of the Staff Regula-
tions;

— order the European Parliament to make good all the loss

thereby sustained by the applicants;

— order the European Parliament to pay the costs;

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicants, who are all officials or other servants of the
European Parliament, had sought to have their pension rights
acquired in Belgium transferred to the Community system, in
accordance with the provisions of a Belgian law enacted in
1991. In 2003 Belgium enacted a new law which, in the appli-
cants' submission, provides more favourable conditions for new
transfers of that type. As the applicants had already transferred
their rights, however, they were unable to take advantage of
the provisions of the Law of 2003.

The applicants therefore submitted a request seeking to obtain
the assistance provided for in Article 24 of the Staff Regula-
tions. The European Parliament, which had no intention of
assisting its officials and temporary servants to secure those
transfers, rejected their request by decision of 14 November
2005.

By their action, the applicants contest that decision, which they
treat as a refusal to afford assistance, in breach of Article 24 of
the Staff Regulations. In addition to that article, they rely in
support of their claims on a breach of the duty to have regard
to the welfare of the staff, of the principle of non-discrimina-
tion, of the prohibition of arbitrary process, of the obligation
to state reasons, of legitimate expectations and of the rule
‘patere legem quam ipse fecisti’ and on a misuse of powers.

Action brought on 6 March 2006 — Vienne and Others v
European Parliament

(Case F-22/06)

(2006/C 108/59)

Language of the case: French

Action brought on 3 March 2006 — Abad-Villanueva and
Others v Commission

(Case F-23/06)

(2006/C 108/60)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Philippe Vienne (Bascharage, Luxembourg) and
Others (represented by: G. Bounéou and F. Frabetti, lawyers)

Applicants: Roberto Abad-Villanueva and Others (represented
by: T. Bontinck and J. Feld, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities