Case F-71/06: Action brought on 26 June 2006 — Lebedef-Caponi v Commission
Date: 2006-08-12
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European Commission, action by staff, professional career, staff assessment

C 190/36

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

12.8.2006

Form of order sought

— annul

the individual decisions rejecting the applicants'
requests that the Appointing Authority adopt transitional
measures in order to ensure, in the context of the 2005
and subsequent promotion exercises, equal treatment and
their acquired rights;

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.

— Order the Commission of the European Communities to

pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of their action, the applicants put forward pleas
identical to those put forward in Case F-45/06 (1).

In support of their action, the applicants put forward identical
pleas to those put forward in Case F-47/06 (1).

(1) OJ C 143, 17.06.2006, p. 39.

(1) OJ C 154, 1.07.2006, p. 25.

Action brought on 26 June 2006 — Baele and Others v
Commission

(Case F-70/06)

(2006/C 190/67)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Action brought on 26 June 2006 — Lebedef-Caponi v
Commission

(Case F-71/06)

(2006/C 190/68)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Maddalena Lebedef-Caponi
bourg) (represented by: F. Frabetti, lawyer)

(Senningerberg, Luxem-

Applicants:
sented by: S. Rodrigues and A. Jaume, lawyers)

Jan Baele (Beernem, Belgium) and others (repre-

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

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

— Annul the applicant's Career Development Report (CDR)

for the period 1.1.2004 — 31.12.2004

— Order the Commission of the European Communities to

pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of her action, the applicant puts forward three pleas
alleging:

— (1)

infringement of

the General provisions for

imple-
menting Article 43 of the Staff Regulations on the statutory
and trade union staff-representatives,
infringement of the
principle of the protection of legitimate expectations and of
the rule ‘patere legem quam ipse fecisti’,

12.8.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 190/37

— (2) infringement of the principle of the prohibition of arbi-
trary process and of the principle of the prohibition of
abuse of powers, and infringement of the duty to give
reasons and of the rights of the defence;

— (3) infringement of the duty to have regard for the welfare

and/or interests of officials.

Action brought on 30 June 2006 — Verheyden v Commis-
sion

(Case F-72/06)

(2006/C 190/69)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Luc Verheyden (Angera,
Boigelot, lawyer)

Italy)

(represented by: E.

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

— order the production of the files concerning the applicant
and sealed by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and
all the evidence and documents collected by OLAF against
the applicant;

— order the production of the warrant of the OLAF inspec-

tors;

— order the production of any OLAF report concerning the
investigation, whether or not sent to the Italian judicial
authorities, including the final report of the internal investi-
gation;

— order the defendant to pay damages, assessed on an equi-
to increase and/or

table basis at EUR 30 000, subject
decrease in the course of the proceedings;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of his action, the applicant, in addition to putting
forward very similar pleas to those raised in connection with
Case F-5/05 (1) and raising the same pleas of unlawfulness as
invoked in that case, also contends that Council Regulation
(EC, Euratom) No 723/2004 of 22 March 2004 amending the
Staff Regulations of officials of the European Communities and
the Conditions of Employment of other servants of the Euro-
pean Communities (2) is unlawful as to the part which inserts
Article 1 of Annex IX to the Staff Regulations.

(1) OJ C 82 of 2.4.2005 (case initially registered before the Court of
First Instance of the European Communities under number T-22/05
and transferred to the European Civil Service Tribunal by order of
15.12.2005).

(2) OJ L 124 of 27.4.2004, p. 1.

Action brought on 3 July 2006 — Van Neyghem v
Commission

(Case F-73/06)

(2006/C 190/70)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Kris Van Neyghem (Vissenaken, Belgium)
sented by: S. Rodrigues, A.
lawyers)

(repre-
Jaume and C. Bernard-Glanz,

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

— annul the investigation into the applicant;

Form of order sought

— annul the Note from OLAF notifying the investigation and
providing information to the Italian judicial authorities and
the despatch of
the investigation to the
Italian judicial authorities;

the reports of

— annul the intermediate and final reports of the investiga-

tion;

— annul the implicit decisions rejecting the applicant's appli-

cation and complaint;

— annul all measures which may be taken subsequently to the
bringing of this action following and/or relating to those
decisions;

— Annul the director of EPSO's decision of 1 June 2005 not
to admit the applicant to the oral test in competition EPSO/
A/19/04;

— Order the defendant to pay the applicant the symbolic sum
of one euro, by way of compensation for his non-material
damage;

— Order the defendant to pay the applicant an amount to be
left to the Tribunal's discretion, by way of compensation
for his material damage, consisting of his loss of the oppor-
tunity of being appointed to a higher grade;

— Order the defendant to pay the costs.