Case F-44/07: Action brought on 14 May 2007 — Barbin v Parliament
Date: 2007-07-07
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European Parliament, European official, action by staff, promotion, staff assessment

7.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 155/45

— restructure the applicant's career (including valuation of her
experience in the grade as thus corrected, her rights to
advancement to a higher step and her pension rights), on
the grade at which she would have been
the basis of
appointed on the basis of the competition notice in pursu-
ance of which she was placed on the list of suitable candi-
dates, either to the grade mentioned on that competition
notice or
to the grade corresponding to its equivalent
according to the classification in the new Staff Regulations,
as from the date of the decision to appoint her;

— award the applicant interest for late payment on the basis of
the rate set by the European Central Bank on all sums corre-
sponding to the difference between the salary corresponding
to her classification in the decision to appoint her and the
classification to which she ought to have been entitled, until
the date on which the decision to classify her in her proper
grade is taken.

Pleas in law and main arguments

As a successful candidate in competition CJ/LA/32 (1), the notice
for which was published before 1 May 2004, the applicant was
recruited before the entry into force of 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 (2). Pursuant to
the provisions of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations of the
European Communities (‘the Staff Regulations’) as amended by
the above regulation, she was classified in grade AD7 instead of
the grades LA7 or LA6 set out in the competition notice.

In her application, the applicant relies on, inter alia, infringe-
ment of Article 5(5) of the Staff Regulations, of the principles
of equal treatment, proportionality, sound administration and
the protection of legitimate expectations and of Article 31(1) of
the Staff Regulations, in so far as, first, she was recruited at a
grade lower than that referred to in the competition notice and,
secondly, the classification of successful candidates in the same
competition was set at different levels depending on whether
they were recruited before or after the entry into force of Regu-
lation No 723/2004.

In addition, the applicant pleads infringement of Article 10 of
the Staff Regulations, in so far as the Committee referred to by
that provision was not consulted on the issue of the classifica-
tion of successful candidates in the competitions, the notices for
which referred to the old career structure.

Action brought on 14 May 2007 — Barbin v Parliament

(Case F-44/07)

(2007/C 155/83)

Language of the case: French

Parties

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

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Tribunal should:

— declare that paragraph I.2(c) of the ‘Implementing measures
relating to the allocation of merit and promotion points’ of
the European Parliament of 10 May 2006 is illegal;

— annul the appointing authority's decision of 16 October
2006 to allocate the applicant one merit point under the
2005 promotion procedure;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant, a European Parliament official of grade AD11,
puts forward very similar pleas to those put forward in Case
F-148/06 (1).

(1) OJ C 42 of 24.2.2007, p. 48.

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 25 May 2007 —
Antas v Council

(Case F-92/06) (1)

(2007/C 155/84)

Language of the case: French

(1) OJ C 221 A, 3.8.1999, p. 7.
(2) OJ L 124, 27.4.2004, p. 1.

The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be
removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 237, 30.9.2006, p. 21.