Case F-46/06: Action brought on  4 May 2006  — Skareby v Commission
Date: 2006-06-17
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European Commission, European official, action by staff, professional career, staff assessment

17.6.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 143/39

Action brought on 25 April 2006 — Martin Avendano and
Others v Commission

tion of the additional grades A*9 and B*9 between the old
grades A7 (now A*8) and A6 (now A*10) and between the old
grades B2 (now B*8) and B1 (now B*10).

(Case F-45/06)

(2006/C 143/74)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Javier Martin Avendano and Others (represented by:
S. Rodrigues and A. Jaume, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

— Annul the refusal of the appointing authority to enter the
applicants on the list of officials promoted to grades A*10
and B*10 under the 2005 promotion exercise such as those
decisions implicitly result from Administrative Notice No
85-2005 of 23 November 2005;

— Inform the appointing authority of the consequences of
annulling the contested decisions, and in particular the
reclassification of the applicants' grades to grade A*10 with
retroactive effect from 1 March 2005 or to grade B*10
with retroactive effect from 1 January 2005, as appropriate;

— In the alternative: (1) request the defendant to acknowledge
that the applicants are eligible for promotion to grade A*10
or to grade B*10, as appropriate, on their next promotion
and (2) order it to pay compensation for the loss suffered
by the applicants as a result of not having been promoted
to grade A*10 from 1 March 2005 or to grade B*10 from
1 January 2005, as appropriate;

— Order the defendant to pay the costs.

In support of their application, the applicants submit that the
application in their case of Article 2 of Annex XIII to the Staff
Regulations, without any specific measure to compensate for
the loss suffered in terms of their careers, is unlawful. That plea
of illegality is founded, first, on breach of the principle of
equivalence between the old and new career structures, a prin-
ciple laid down by Article 6 of the Staff Regulations. Pursuant
to that provision, the appointing authority should have entered
the applicants on the list of officials promoted to grades A*10
and B*10 under the 2005 promotion exercise.

The applicants also claim to have been victims of a breach of
the principle of equal
treatment by comparison with their
colleagues in grades A7 and B2 who were promoted before the
entry into force of the new Staff Regulations.

first, breach of

the applicants allege,

Lastly,
the legitimate
expectation created on their part by the assurances of the
Council and Commission that the new career structure would
not lead to any deterioration in their working conditions and,
second, breach of their acquired rights and misuse of powers.

Action brought on 4 May 2006 — Skareby v Commission

(Case F-46/06)

(2006/C 143/75)

Language of the case: French

Pleas in law and main arguments

Parties

The applicants are officials of
the old grades A7 or B2.
Following the entry into force of the new Staff Regulations,
their grades were replaced by grades A*8 and B*8 respectively,
pursuant to Article 2 of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations.
They maintain that
their careers have been slowed down
because the new system of classification provides for the inser-

Applicant: Carina Skareby (Bichkek, Kyrgyzstan)
by: S. Rodrigues and Y. Minatchy, lawyers)

(represented

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

C 143/40

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

17.6.2006

Form of order sought

Pleas in law and main arguments

— Annul

the decision of

the appointing authority of 25
January 2006 responding to the applicant's complaint, and
the career development report (CDR) compiled with respect
to her for the period 1 January to 31 December 2004;

— Award the applicant damages for the harm to her career
and for the material and non-material harm suffered, in an
amount assessed in part by the applicant at EUR 20 000,
the remaining part to be assessed by the Tribunal on equi-
table principles;

— Order the Commission of the European Communities to

pay the costs.

In support of her application, the applicant first alleges failure
to comply with the rules relating to the establishment of the
CDR. The authorities infringed the rules of procedure laid
down by the General Implementing Rules for Article 43 of the
Staff Regulations, made manifest errors of assessment and
failed to comply with the duty to give reasons.

The applicant also pleads breach of the rights of the defence, of
the duty to have regard for the interests of officials and of the
principle of sound administration.

Lastly, she claims that the authorities are guilty of a misuse of
powers and of an abuse of process.