Case F-37/06: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 6 December 2006 — Strack v Commission (Officials — Social security — Sickness insurance — Occupational illness — Act adversely affecting an official — Manifest inadmissibility)
Date: 2006-12-30
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European Commission, European official, action by staff, damages, occupational disease, personnel administration, regulations for civil servants

C 331/48

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.12.2006

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of
14 December 2006 — André v Commission

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of
14 December 2006 — Klopfer v Commission

(Case F-10/06) (1)

(Case F-118/05) (1)

(Officials — Auxiliary staff — Contract Conference inter-
preter — Conditions for payment of the flat-rate travel allow-
ance)

(2006/C 331/106)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Daniel André (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: M.
Jourdan, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: J. Currall and D. Martin, Agents)

Re:

the Commission decision of 6 October
First, annulment of
2005 refusing to pay the applicant,
in respect of services
provided for and at the request of the Court of Justice on 12
and 13 January 2005, the flat-rate allowance laid down by
Article 7 of the Agreement on working conditions and financial
terms for contract conference interpreters recruited by the insti-
tutions of the European Union and, secondly, an application for
damages

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

(Officials — Open competition — Non-admission to tests —
Necessary professional experience — Part-time work)

(2006/C 331/107)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Matthias Klopfer (Berlin, Germany) (represented by:
W. Daniels and E. Pätzel, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: H. Kraemer and K. Herrmann, Agents)

Re:

Annulment of the decision of the Appointing Authority not to
admit the applicant to the tests in competition EPSO/B/11/03
on the ground of insufficient professional experience, since his
part-time work was taken into account only after a weighting
was applied.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible;

2. The parties are ordered to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 60, 11.3.2006.

1. annuls the decision of the Commission of the European Commu-
nities, dated 8 March 2005, refusing Mr André the flat-rate travel
allowance in respect of services provided on 12 and 13 January
2005 for the Court of Justice of the European Communities in
Luxembourg;

2. orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay the
applicant that allowance, plus default interest at a rate two points
above that set by the European Central Bank for its main refinan-
cing operations, as applicable during the period in question, from
14 February 2005;

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of
6 December 2006 — Strack v Commission

(Case F-37/06) (1)

(Officials — Social security — Sickness insurance — Occupa-
tional illness — Act adversely affecting an official — Mani-
fest inadmissibility)

(2006/C 331/108)

Language of the case: French

3. orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay the

costs.

Parties

(1) OJ C 96, 22.4.2006.

Applicant: Guido Strack (Cologne, Germany) (represented by: G.
Bouneou and F. Frabetti, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: J. Currall and H. Kraemer, Agents)

30.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 331/49

Re:

2. Each party is to bear its own costs.

First, annulment of
the Commission's decision rejecting the
applicant's request that his illness should be acknowledged to be
an occupational illness and, second, an application for damages.

(1) OJ C 154, 1.7.2006.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.

2. Each party shall bear its own costs.

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of
19 December 2006 — Suhadolnik v Court of Justice

(1) OJ C 131, 3.6.2006, p. 53.

(Case F-78/06) (1)

(Officials — Recruitment — Appointment — Probationary
period — Probationer — Establishment — Grading by grade
and step — Transitional measures of Annex XIII to the Staff
Regulations — Admissibility the action)

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of
13 December 2006 — Aimi and Others v Commission

(Case F-47/06) (1)

Parties

(2006/C 331/110)

Language of the case: French

(Officials — Promotion — Career — Version of the Staff
Regulations applicable on 1 May 2004 — Transition to a new
career structure — Measure of general application — Equal
treatment — Legal interest in bringing proceedings)

Simona

Applicant:
Luxembourg)
(represented by: S. Rodrigues, A. Jaume, and C. Bernard-Glanz,
lawyers)

Suhadolnik (Luxembourg,

(2006/C 331/109)

Language of the case: French

Defendant: Court of Justice of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: M. Schauss, Agent)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Council of the European
Union (represented by: M. Arpio and I. Sulce, Agents)

Parties

Re:

Applicants: Nicola Aimi (Evere, Belgium) and Others (represented
by: A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis and E. Marchal, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: C. Berardis-Kayser and K. Herrmann, Agents)

Firstly, annulment of the decision of the Court of Justice of
22 July 2005 establishing the applicant and fixing her grade in
accordance with Article 12(3) of Annex XIII to the Staff Regula-
tions and her step in accordance with the new version of
Article 32 of the Staff Regulations and, secondly, a request for
reclassification and a claim for damages.

Re:

that

the Appointing Authority adopt

Annulment of the individual decisions rejecting the applicants'
requests
transitional
measures in order to guarantee, in the context of the 2005 and
subsequent promotion exercises, equal
treatment and their
acquired rights

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible;

Operative part of the order

The Tribunal:

1. Dismisses the action as manifestly inadmissible.

2. Orders the parties to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 237, 30.9.2006, p. 17.