Case F-51/07: Action brought on 30 May 2007 — Bui Van v Commission
Date: 2007-07-21
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European Commission, European official, action by staff, equal treatment, personnel administration, professional career, regulations for civil servants

21.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 170/43

The applicant furthermore pleads the infringement of Articles 7,
14, 29 and 45 of
the
the Staff Regulations of Officials of
European Communities, the disregard of several general
legal
principles and the misuse of powers.

prospects, equality of treatment and the duty to give reasons,
and he also pleads a manifest error of assessment. In particular,
he asserts that the administration, after annulling, following his
the decision to award him 2 merit points,
first complaint,
should have promoted him to grade AD13.

(1) Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 4 July 2006, Tzirani v

Commission (not yet published in the ECR).

Finally, the applicant contends that he was discriminated against
because of his activities as a representative of the personnel,
contrary to Article 1d and 24b of the Staff Regulations, to the
sixth paragraph of Article 1 of Annex II of the Staff Regulations
and to Article 17 of the Agreement of 12 July 1990 between
the European Parliament and the trade unions or staff associa-
tions of the personnel of the institution.

Action brought on 21 May 2007 –Behmer v Parliament

(Case F-47/07)

(2007/C 170/82)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Joachim Behmer (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by:
S. Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis and E. Marchal, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament

Parties

Action brought on 30 May 2007 — Bui Van v Commission

(Case F-51/07)

(2007/C 170/83)

Language of the case: French

Form of order sought

Applicant: Philippe Bui Van (Hettange Grande, France)
sented by: S. Rodrigues and R. Albelice, lawyers)

(repre-

— Declare unlawful the decision of the Bureau of the European
Parliament relating to the ‘Policy on promotion and on
career planning’ of 6 July 2005 and the ‘Implementing
measures relating to the award of merit points and to
promotion’ of 25 July 2005;

— Annul

the decision of
promote the applicant
1 January 2005 in the 2005 promotions procedure;

the appointing authority not
to grade A*13 with effect

to
from

— Order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Service,

the Trade Union of

The applicant, a grade AD12 official of the European Parliament
who is currently Vice-President of
the
European Public
(Union Syndicale
Luxembourg), pleads in the first place the unlawfulness of the
decisions referred to in the first indent above, which are in his
opinion general provisions for giving effect to the Staff Regula-
tions of Officials of the European Communities (‘Staff Regula-
tions’) for the purposes of Article 110 thereof.

Luxembourg

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

— annul the decision of the Appointing Authority of 5 March

2007 not to accept the applicant's complaint;

— annul

the decision of

the Director General of

the Joint
Research Centre (JRC) of 4 October 2006 in so far as it
reclassifies the applicant in Grade AST 3, Step 2, whereas he
had initially been classified in Grade AST 4, Step 2;

— state to the Appointing Authority the consequences of the
annulment of the contested decisions and, in particular, clas-
sification in Grade AST 4, Step 2, the retroactive effect of
appointment in Grade AST 4, Step 2, from the date the post
was first taken up, the consequences in regard to different
remuneration and default interest on the payment of the
difference, as well as consequences in regard to promotion;

— award the applicant the symbolic sum of one euro by way

of compensation for his non-material loss;

The applicant also pleads infringement of Article 45 of the Staff
Regulations and of the principles governing reasonable career

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

C 170/44

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

21.7.2007

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant, a successful candidate in Open Competition
EPSO/B/23/04 (1) for the establishment of a reserve list for the
recruitment of
laboratory technicians in Grade B5/B4, was
appointed as a probationary official after 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 of the European Communities (2). An initial deci-
sion of 28 June 2006 classifying the applicant in Grade AST 4
was withdrawn and replaced by the contested decision classi-
fying the applicant in Grade AST 3.

tion, in particular in so far as some of his colleagues, who had
been similarly downgraded, were reclassified in Grade AST 4 at
the end of the pre-litigation procedure.

Second, the applicant pleads a manifest error of assessment and
legal certainty and protection of
breach of the principles of
legitimate expectations. The applicant submits, in particular, that
the decision of 28 June 2006 was not withdrawn within a
reasonable time.

In support of his application, the applicant relies first on infrin-
gement of the principles of equal treatment and non-discrimina-

(1) OJ C 81 A, 31.3.2004, p. 17.
(2) OJ L 124, 27.4.2004, p. 1.