Case F-142/06: Action brought on 28 December 2006 — Bligny v Commission
Date: 2007-01-27
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: EPSO, European Commission, European citizenship, action for annulment (EU), competition (EU), official document

C 20/40

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

27.1.2007

Form of order sought

The Tribunal is asked to:

— Annul the decision of the Commission to approve the appli-
cant a probationary official with effect from 1 April 2006
inasmuch as that decision fixes his grade and step as A*6/2
and does not take into account the points he accumulated
as a ‘research’ temporary agent;

— Order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

On 16 January 2004, the applicant entered the service of the
Commission as a ‘research’ temporary agent in Grade A7. As a
successful
in Open Competition COM/A/3/02
published on 25 July 2002 to constitute a reserve list for the
recruitment of administrators in career bracket A7/A6, he was
appointed a probationary official in Grade A*6.

candidate

In view of the undertaking made by the Commission to extend
the effects of possible annulment in pending cases concerning
Article 12 of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations, the applicant
confines himself to relying on breach of the principle of equal
treatment and non-discrimination in relation to former collea-
gues, also ‘research’ temporary agents, who had been successful
in internal competitions and, when established as officials,
retained their grade and accumulated points.

The applicant further asserts in so far as is necessary, that
Article 5(4) of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations is unlawful,
to the extent that it fails to comply with the above-mentioned
principle and the principle of proportionality.

12 April 2006 and of 27 March 2006 respectively,
concerning a transfer from the status of a member of
temporary staff to the status of official;

— Order the defendants to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

the
The applicant, after working for a number of years at
Commission as a member of temporary staff in Grade B*7,
passed open competition PE/34/B of the European Parliament
(Grade B5/B4). Subsequently, he was appointed as a proba-
tionary official
in Grade B*3 by the latter institution, which
immediately transferred him to the Commission, where he was
classified in that same grade.

In support of his action, the applicant pleads infringement of
Articles 31 and 62 of the Staff Regulations and Articles 5 and 2
of Annex XIII thereto.

The applicant pleads, moreover, breach of the principle of the
protection of
legitimate expectations and of the principle of
maintenance of rights acquired.

Action brought on 28 December 2006 — Bligny v
Commission

(Case F-142/06)

(2007/C 20/62)

Language of the case: French

Action brought on 11 December 2006 — Hartwig v
Commission and Parliament

Parties

(Case F-141/06)

(2007/C 20/61)

Applicant: Francesco Bligny (Tassin-la-Demi-Lune, France) (repre-
sented by: P. Lebel-Nourissat, avocat)

Language of the case: French

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Parties

Applicant: Marc Hartwig (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: T.
Bontinck, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities and Euro-
pean Parliament

Form of order sought

— annul the individual decisions of the Commission of the
European Communities and of the European Parliament of

Form of order sought

— annul the decision of the selection board for competition
EPSO/AD/06/05 of 7 December 2006 and that of
23 November 2006, refusing to admit the applicant to the
competition and therefore to correct his written test;

— find that the application form published on 15 May 2006
the
on the EPSO internet site for use by candidates of
competition was improper;

— order the defendant to pay to the applicant the sum of

EUR 5 000 in compensation for his loss;

— Order the defendant to pay the costs.

27.1.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 20/41

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant, after passing the pre-selection tests for the above-
mentioned competition, was not admitted to the next stage
since, contrary to what was indicated in the notice of competi-
tion published in the Official Journal (1), he had failed to include
with his application form any document proving his citizenship.

In support of his action, the applicant pleads breach of the prin-
ciple of protection of legitimate expectations, of the principle of
sound administration and of the duty to have regard for the
welfare of officials. He submits in particular that, concerning
citizenship, the model application form to be downloaded from
the EPSO internet site merely required an honour declaration
and warned candidates that, on request, they would have to
provide documentary evidence.

(1) OJ C 178 A of 27.7.2005, p. 3.

Action brought on 18 December 2006 — Continolo v
Commission

(Case F-143/06)

(2007/C 20/63)

Language of the case: French

11 June 1981 to 1 March 1983 only 5 months, 6 days of
pensionable service, instead of 8 months, 20 days;

— annul the decision of the Commission of 5 September 2006

dismissing the applicant's complaint;

— indicate to the Commission the consequences of the annul-
ment of the contested decisions,
in particular, concerning
the percentage acquired, currently fixed at 66.66666 %,
which must be recalculated to take account of the months
of January and February 1983;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant, a former Commission official, has been retired
since 1 January 2006. In his action, he contests the decision of
the Commission concerning the award and calculation of his
the
pension rights inasmuch as that decision discloses that
rights which he acquired for the period of his leave on personal
grounds, in respect of which he had obtained a transfer into the
Community system, have not been wholly credited.

The applicant relies, first, on breach of the principle of protec-
tion of legitimate expectations, of the principle of sound admin-
istration and of the duty to have regard for the welfare of offi-
cials and, secondly, on a manifest error of assessment and of a
breach of the duty to state reasons.

Action brought on 22 December 2006 — Bleyaert v
Council

Parties

Applicant: Donato Continolo (Duino, Italy) (represented by: S.
Rodrigues, C. Bernard-Glanz and R. Albelice, lawyers)

(Case F-144/06)

(2007/C 20/64)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Language of the case: French

Form of order sought

The Tribunal is asked to:

Parties

— annul the decision of the Commission of 3 January 2006
concerning the award and calculation of
the applicant's
pension rights to the extent that it credits the period which
the applicant spent on leave on personal grounds from

Applicant: Eric Bleyaert (Maldegem, Belgium) (represented by: S.
Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis and E. Marchal, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union