Case F-79/06: Action brought on 24 July 2006 — Caló v Commission
Date: 2006-09-30
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European Commission, European official, Eurostat, action by staff, administrator, appointment of staff, reassignment

30.9.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 237/17

Action brought on 20 July 2006 — Simona Suhadolnik v
Court of Justice of the European Communities

(Case F-78/06)

(2006/C 237/29)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Simona Suhadolnik (Howald, Luxembourg)
sented by: S. Rodrigues, A.
lawyers)

(repre-
Jaume and C. Bernard-Glanz,

Defendant: Court of Justice of the European Communities

Form of order sought

As regards her classification in grade, the applicant pleads prin-
cipally that Article 12(3) of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations,
which governs the status of officials who have been included
on a list of suitable candidates, does not apply to successful
competition candidates, as they cannot be considered as offi-
cials.

In the alternative, the applicant submits a plea of illegality in
relation to Article 12(3) of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations
on the grounds, in particular, that this provision infringes: (i)
the principle of non-discrimination,
the principle of
freedom of movement for workers, (iii) the principles of protec-
tion of legitimate expectations and legal certainty, (iv) the prin-
ciple of proportionality, (v) the principle of good administra-
tion and the duty to have regard for the welfare of officials, (vi)
Article 31 of the Staff Regulations, and (vii) Article 10 of the
Staff Regulations.

(ii)

As regards her classification in step, the applicant considers
that the appointing authority breached its duty to protect her
legitimate expectation that she would be granted a step bonus,
as a result of her professional experience, under the version of
Article 32 of the Staff Regulations in force before 1 May 2004.

— annul the decision of the appointing authority of the Court

of Justice refusing the applicant's complaint;

(1) OJ C 120, 22.5.2003, p. 30.

— annul the decision to establish the applicant of 22 July
2005 insofar as it determines her grade pursuant to Article
12(3) of Annex XIII of the Staff Regulations, and determines
her step in accordance with the new version of Article 32
of the Staff Regulations;

— reclassify the applicant in grade C*3, or, at least, in grade
C*2, as well as at the step corresponding to her qualifica-
tions and professional experience, which she would have
been granted if she had been appointed before 1 May
2004, with retroactive effect from the date on which she
took up her duties;

— order

the defendant

for
damage suffered (default interest, damage to her career,
pension rights etc.);

to compensate the applicant

Action brought on 24 July 2006 — Caló v Commission

(Case F-79/06)

(2006/C 237/30)

Language of the case: French

— order the defendant to pay default interest, from the date of

the decision to be adopted;

Parties

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

By the appointing authority's decision of 22 July 2005, the
applicant, who was a successful candidate in open competition
EPSO/C/9/03 held for the purpose of constituting a reserve list
for the recruitment of Cypriot, Czech, Estonian, Hungarian,
Lithuanian, Latvian, Maltese, Polish, Slovene and Slovak typists
(C5/C4),1 was appointed as an official of the European Com-
munity and classified at grade C*1, step (1).

In her application, the applicant takes issue with her classifica-
tion and calls into question first, Article 12(3) of Annex XIII to
the Staff Regulations, on which the appointing authority relied
in determining her grade, and, second, the new version of
Article 32 of the Staff Regulations, on which the appointing
authority relied to determine her step.

Applicant: Giuseppe Caló (Luxembourg, Luxembourg)
(repre-
sented by: S. Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis and E. Marchal,
lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

— Annulment of the decisions of the Director-General of DG
Eurostat providing for, first, the reorganisation of that DG
by way of acts changing the duties assigned to directors
and, second, the rejection of the applicant's request to be
appointed to one of the vacant posts of director, or one
that might become vacant.

— An order that the defendant should pay the costs.

C 237/18

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.9.2006

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant, an official of the defendant, after challenging
before the Court of First Instance of the European Commu-
nities, first, the decision to reassign him to the post of Chief
Adviser in the DG in which he was employed (1) and, second,
the decision to reject his application for a post of Director in
the same DG (2), currently disputes the defendant's decisions,
taken in the context of the reorganisation of DG Eurostat, to
reject his application for the post of Director announced in
vacancy notice COM/2006/164, and to appoint another candi-
date to that post.

In support of his application, the applicant relies on infringe-
ment of: (i) the duty to give reasons, (ii) Article 27 of the Staff
Regulations and (iii) of the Rules of Conduct for Appointments
to Posts in Grades A1 and A2, approved by the defendant on
18 September 1999, as confirmed and further defined by the
Compilation Document on Senior Officials Policy, approved by
the defendant on 26 October 2004.

(1) Case T-118/04 (OJ C 118, 30.04.2004, p. 47).
(2) Case T-134/04 (OJ C 146, 29.05.2004, p. 6).

In support of his application, the applicant relies on the seven
following pleas in law:

— first, infringement of Article 45 of the Staff Regulations;

— second,

infringement of the general

implementing provi-

sions in respect of that article;

— third, infringement of the principle of non-discrimination;

— fourth, infringement of the Administrative Guide ‘Appraisal

and Promotion of Officials’, and of successive Guides;

— fifth, infringement of the principles of prohibition of arbi-
trary procedures and of abuse of powers, and also infringe-
ment of the duty to give reasons;

— sixth, infringement of the principle of protection of legiti-
mate expectations, and of the rule ‘Patere legem quam ipse
fecisti’ (obey the rules which you yourself have made);

— seventh, infringement of the duty to have regard for the

welfare of officials.

Action brought on 30 July 2006 — Schell v Commission

(Case F-83/06)

(2006/C 237/31)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Arno Schell (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: F.
Frabetti, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

— Annul the lists of officials promoted in the 2004 and 2005
promotion years, in so far as these lists do not contain the
applicant's name, and also,
the preparatory
actions of those decisions;

incidentally,

— in the alternative, annul the allocation of promotion points

in those years in so far as the applicant is concerned;

Action brought on 28 July 2006 — Bellantone v Court of
Auditors

(Case F-85/06)

(2006/C 237/32)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Gerardo Bellantone
(represented by: T. Bontinck and J. Feld, lawyers)

(Luxembourg, Luxembourg)

Defendant: European Court of Auditors

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Tribunal should:

— Annul the decision of the Secretary-General of the Euro-
pean Court of Auditors of 30 March 2006 rejecting the
applicant's complaint seeking payment of the balance of the
allowance in lieu of additional notice, of the severance
grant and of the daily subsistence allowance;

— Order the defendant to pay: (i) EUR 20 751,45 in respect of
additional notice, (ii) EUR 39 247,74 corresponding to the
severance grant to which the applicant could have been
entitled, (iii) EUR 8 467,02 in respect of daily subsistence
allowance;

— Order the defendant to pay interest for late payment until

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

payment is made;