Case C-213/06 P: Appeal brought on  9 May 2006  by the European Agency for Reconstruction (EAR) against the judgement of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) delivered on  23 February 2006  in Case T-471/04: Georgios Karatzoglou v European Agency for Reconstruction (EAR)
Date: 2006-07-29
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Agency for Reconstruction, General Court (EU), appeal, servant (EU), termination of a contract, work contract

29.7.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 178/19

4. Must Articles 18 EC, 39 EC and 43 EC be interpreted as not
permitting the scope of such a system to be limited to
persons who are resident in the territorial components of a
federal Member State of the European Community which
are covered by that system?

(1) OJ, English Special Edition 1971(II), p. 416.

Appeal brought on 9 May 2006 by the European Agency
for Reconstruction (EAR) against the judgement of the
Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) delivered on 23
February 2006 in Case T-471/04: Georgios Karatzoglou v
European Agency for Reconstruction (EAR)

(Case C-213/06 P)

(2006/C 178/30)

dant as a contract for an indefinite period of employment, it
decided that the European Agency for Reconstruction (herein-
after EAR) could only terminate that contract in two circum-
stances — substantial reduction or winding-up of EAR's opera-
tion — which would be tantamount to considering the contract
as a contract for a fixed term of employment the duration of
which depended upon those criteria.

The applicant further maintains that the Court of First Instance
erred in law in so deciding because Council Regulation No
2667/2000 (1) which lays down rules concerning the func-
tioning of EAR forbids the EAR to contract such an obligation
since it is obliged to limit the recruitment of staff to what is
strictly necessary with regard to the evolving needs of the EAR.

The applicant finally submits that should the EAR have created
a legitimate expectation not
to terminate the defendant's
contract except in the specific circumstance of a significant
reduction of its operation, such an expectation would be illegi-
timate with regard to the obligation deriving from the Condi-
the European
tions of Employment of Other Servants of
Communities and from the Council regulations governing the
creation and functioning of the EAR.

Language of the case: English

(1) OJ L 305, p. 7.

Parties

Appellant: European Agency for Reconstruction (EAR) (repre-
sented by: S. Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis and E. Marchal,
lawyers and K. Niafas, agent)

Other party to the proceedings: Georgios Karatzoglou

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— Set aside the judgement of the Fourth Chamber of the
Court of First Instance of 23 February 2006 in Case T-471/
04 (Georgios Karatzoglou v European Agency for Recon-
struction (EAR) ) in full;

— Give judgement itself;

— Dismiss the action for annulment of the decision of the
EAR of 26 February 2004 terminating the contract of the
applicant at first instance as a member of the termporary
staff;

— Order the applicant at first instance and respondent on

appeal to pay the costs of the appeal.

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale
Amministrativo Regionale per la Lombardia lodged on 11
May 2006 — Colasfalti srl v Provincia di Milano, ATI
Legrenzi Srl,Impresa Costruzioni Edili e Stradali dei F. 11i
Paccani Snc

(Case C-214/06)

(2006/C 178/31)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per la Lombardia

Parties to the main proceedings

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant(s): Colasfalti srl

The applicant submits that the Court of First Instance erred in
law when, having qualified the contract signed by the defen-

Defendant(s): Provincia di Milano, ATI Legrenzi Srl,Impresa
Costruzioni Edili e Stradali dei F. 11i Paccani Snc