Case F-59/07: Action brought on 15 June 2007 — Feral v Committee of the Regions
Date: 2007-08-25
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European Committee of the Regions, account, action by staff, capital transfer, legal profession, regulations for civil servants, savings

25.8.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 199/51

— order the defendant to pay, as damages for pecuniary and
non-pecuniary loss and in respect of the adverse effect on
the applicant's career, the sum of EUR 25 000, subject to
any increase or decrease in the course of the proceedings;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Action brought on 15 June 2007 — Feral v Committee of
the Regions

(Case F-59/07)

(2007/C 199/99)

Language of the case: French

Pleas in law and main arguments

Parties

The applicant — a former member of the temporary staff who
was appointed an official in grade A*11 from 16 April 2004,
following his success in an internal competition — was consid-
ered ineligible for promotion under the 2006 promotion exer-
cise, because (i) he had not demonstrated his ability to work in
a third language, in accordance with Article 45(2) of the Staff
Regulations of Officials of the European Communities (‘the Staff
Regulations’) and (ii) he was not entitled to benefit from the
exception designed for officials who already had two years'
experience in their existing grade as at 1 April 2006.

In support of his action, the applicant relies on four pleas in
law, the first of which alleges breach of Article 45 of the Staff
Regulations and that
the administration committed manifest
errors of assessment. In particular, the applicant submits that,
under the transitional provisions of Article 11 of Annex XIII to
the Staff Regulations, Article 45(2) of the Staff Regulation ought
not to have been applied to the 2006 promotion exercise, espe-
cially since the rules for implementing that provision were fina-
lised only in December 2006. As it was not until August 2006
that the applicant was informed that the provision at issue
applied to his case, he maintains that he did not have access to
the training necessary to enable him to acquire the ability to
work in a third language within a reasonable period of time.

The second plea in law alleges breach of the duty to have regard
to the welfare of officials, infringement of the principles of good
administration and sound management and the existence of a
misuse of powers. The applicant submits in particular that the
administration did not have the right to apply Article 45(2) of
the Staff Regulations to him at the last minute.

The third plea in law alleges infringement of the principles of
legitimate expectations and legal certainty. The
protection of
Commission's departments,
the applicant submits, gave him
precise and consistent assurances as to the non-applicability to
his case of the new requirement imposed by Article 45(2) of the
Staff Regulations.

The fourth plea alleges infringement of the principles of equal
treatment of staff, non-discrimination and proportionality. The
applicant claims that he was placed at a disadvantage in relation
following
to other members of
success in an internal competition entitling them to establish-
ment, had already been appointed officials by 1 April 2004,
unlike the applicant.

the temporary staff, who,

Applicant: Pierre-Alexis Feral (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by:
M.-A. Lucas, lawyer)

Defendant: Committee of the Regions of the European Union
(CoR)

Form of order sought

— annul the decision of the Administration Director and the
Secretary General of the CoR of 26 July 2006 to recover the
amounts paid to the applicant in application of the correc-
tion coefficient for that part of his remuneration transferred
to France between March 2003 and May 2005;

— annul the decision of 4 December 2006 of the Administra-
tion Director of CoR fixing that amount at EUR 3 600,16;

— order

the CoR to repay to the applicant

the sum of
EUR 3 600,16, plus default interest at the rate of 8 % per
annum from the date of the recovery until payment in full;

— order the CoR to pay to the applicant the amount which
should have been paid to him if the correct correction coef-
ficient had been applied to the part of his remuneration
which should have been transferred to France from June
2005, plus default interest at the rate of 8 % per annum
from the date of the recovery until payment in full;

— order the CoR to resume, from the date of the future judg-
ment, the transfer of part of the applicant's remuneration to
France, with the correction coefficient applicable to that
country;

— order the CoR to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The first plea in law alleges infringement of (i) Article 85 of the
Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities (‘the
Staff Regulations’), (ii) the final indent of the second paragraph
of Article 2 of the Rules laying down the procedure for the
transfer of part of an official's emoluments (‘the Common
Rules’) and (iii) paragraphs 2 and 4 of Conclusion No 204/92 of
the Heads of Administration of 3 December 1992. According to
the applicant, the CoR could not hold that he was not entitled,
pursuant to Article 17(2) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations,
to have part of his remuneration transferred to his building
savings account in France on the ground that he had, through
transfers to a deposit account, brought his building savings
account once more below the maximum amount which could
be saved. In particular, he submits that (i) the Common Rules
do not require that transfers correspond to obligatory payments
and (ii) bringing the building savings account below the
maximum limit in this way is an established banking practice
which complies with French law on building savings accounts,
as referred to by the Conclusion of the Administrative Heads.

C 199/52

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

25.8.2007

The second plea in law alleges infringement of Article 85 of the
Staff Regulations inasmuch as the CoR found that the irregu-
larity of the transfers at issue was so apparent that, in view of
his legal qualifications, the applicant was or, at the very least,
ought to have been aware of it. In that respect, the applicant
considers that: (i) in the light of the Conclusion of the Heads of
Administration, the building savings account which he opened
appeared to correspond to the concept of
‘building savings
contract’ for the purposes of the Common Rules; (ii) bringing
the building savings account below the maximum limit in the
way he did appeared to comply with those rules; (iii) following
reviews in December 2003 and December 2004, his personnel
(iv) having only
file appeared to be complete and in order;
restricted access to his personnel file, he was not in a position
to consult the necessary documents in order to review whether
the transfers were in order.

equal treatment, as interpreted by the Civil Service Tribunal in
its judgment of 14 November 2006 in Case F-100/05 Chat-
ziioannidou v Commission (not yet published).

(1) Administrative Notice No 60/2004 of 9 June 2004.
(2) OJ 1997 L 162, p. 1.

Action brought on 18 June 2007 — Bauch v Commission

(Case F-61/07)

(2007/C 199/101)

Language of the case: German

Action brought on 18 June 2007 — Martin Bermejo v
Commission

Parties

(Case F-60/07)

(2007/C 199/100)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Joaquin Martin Bermejo (Brussels, Belgium)

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

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

— declare the unlawfulness of

the Commission decision of
28 April 2004 adopting the new General
Implementing
Provisions of Article 11 and 12 of Annex VIII to the Staff
Regulations and, to the extent that it is necessary, the unlaw-
fulness of those provisions of the Staff Regulations;

— annul the Commission decision of 27 September 2006 inas-
much as it fixes the calculation of credited pension rights
to the Community pension
transferred by the applicant
scheme;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant pleads the unlawfulness of the General Imple-
menting Provisions of Article 11 and 12 of Annex VIII to the
Staff Regulations on the transfer of pension rights (1), inasmuch
as the rule set out in Article 7(3) thereof infringes Council Regu-
lation (EC) No 1103/97 of 17 June 1997 on certain provisions
relating to the introduction of the euro (2) and the principle of

Applicant: Gerhard Bauch (Berlin, Germany)
W. Uhlmann, lawyer)

(represented by:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

— Direct the defendant to amend its certificate of 12 March
2003 or, alternatively, to issue further confirmation to the
applicant to the effect that the amount repaid to the appli-
cant does not amount
to a severance grant by way of
compensation for retirement pension rights or, therefore, to
the equivalent of a retirement
a retirement pension or
pension;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant was employed by the Commission of the Euro-
pean Communities as a member of the temporary staff. He was
granted unpaid leave for that period of employment from his
post as an official of the then Federal Ministry of Economics.
The Ministry reduced the applicant's retirement pension because
of the cumulation of pension benefits and a pension from inter-
national and supranational employment, as the Commission of
the European Communities had issued the applicant with a
certificate concerning the payment of a severance grant
in
compensation for pension rights.

The applicant complains that the Commission's certificate is
defective inasmuch as members of the temporary staff cannot
acquire pension rights owing to the short period of service
(Articles 77 to 84 of the Staff Regulations), and the applicant
was thus merely refunded the pension fund contributions that
had been deducted.