Case F-91/07: Action brought on 13 September 2007 — Torijano Montero v Council
Date: 2007-11-10
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: Council of the European Union, European official, action by staff, appointment of staff, promotion, regulations for civil servants, staff assessment

C 269/72

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

10.11.2007

In addition, the applicant complains of a breach of the principle
of equal treatment regarding the annual salary and bonus review
(ASBR) procedure and failure to consult the defendant's staff
representatives in accordance with the rules when conducting
the applicant's ASBR in 2006.

powers and a breach of the principles of equal treatment and
reasonable career prospects.

The applicant claims, in addition, that the Commission infringed
Article 1d(1) of the Staff Regulations, inasmuch as it rejected his
candidatures principally because of his African origin.

(1) Judgment of 14 December 2006 in Case F-122/05, OJ C 331,

30.12.2006, p. 47.

Action brought on 17 September 2007 — Traore v
Commission

(Case F-90/07)

(2007/C 269/131)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Amadou Traore (Rhodes Saint Genèse, Belgium)
(represented by: E. Boigelot, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Parties

Action brought on 13 September 2007 — Torijano
Montero v Council

(Case F-91/07)

(2007/C 269/132)

Language of the case: French

Form of order sought

— annul the decision rejecting the applicant's candidature for
the post of chargé d'affaires ad interim at the Commission
Delegation in Togo, to which Mr X was appointed;

— annul Mr X's appointment to the post;

— annul the decision rejecting the applicant's candidature for
the post of Head of Operations at the Commission Delega-
tion in Tanzania, to which Mr Y was appointed;

— annul Mr Y's appointment to the post;

— order the defendant to pay, by way of compensation for the
non-material damage and the detriment to the applicant's
career, in the sum of EUR 3 500;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of his action, the applicant relies, first, on breach of
the recruitment procedure, inasmuch as (i) the level of the posts
at issue was set at Grades AD 9 to AD 14, in breach of the prin-
ciples laid down, principally in the judgment in Economidis v
Commission (1), and (ii) the notice of vacancy for the first of the
posts at
issue and the order of priority laid down in
Article 29(1) of the Staff Regulations of Official of the European
Communities (‘the Staff Regulations’) were not complied with.
He adds that the comparative examination of the merits was
not carried out, demonstrating the existence of a misuse of

Javier Torijano Montero (Brussels, Belgium)

Applicant:
(repre-
sented by: S. Rodrigues, R. Albelice and C. Bernard-Glanz,
lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

— annul the notice of vacancy of 31 October 2006 issued by
the Council, by Staff Note
the General Secretariat of
No 171/06, concerning the post of Head of Department
‘External Security’ in the Council Security Office;

— annul

the decision of

the

appointing

authority of

31 May 2007 rejecting the applicant's complaint;

— state to the appointing authorities the consequences of the
annulment of
in particular,
the contested decision and,
reconsider the grade requirements in the notice of vacancy
in order to allow the applicant to submit his candidature;

— order the Council to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant, an official in Grade AD 6, challenges the above-
mentioned notice of vacancy for limiting the possibility of
submitting candidatures for the post of Head of Department
‘External Security’ in the Council Security Office, a post to be
filled in Grade AD 11, to officials in Grade AD 8 at least.

10.11.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 269/73

After drawing attention to his claim for classification in Grade
AD 8 in Case F-76/05 (1), the applicant relies on breach of the
principle of legitimate expectations, inasmuch as filling the post
at issue would have the effect of causing him to lose his current
position as head of the ‘External Security/Protection of Missions’
sector, to the benefit of the candidate selected.

The applicant claims, in addition, infringement of the interests
of the service, inasmuch as the grade required in the notice of
vacancy does not allow his candidature to be accepted, despite
the fact that he is the best qualified person to carry out the
functions stated in the notice of vacancy. Moreover, the adminis-
tration has not explained how the interests of the service justify
the derogation from Article 31(2) of the Staff Regulations of
Officials of the European Communities, according to which offi-
cials are recruited in Grades AD 5 to AD 8.

— order

the CoR to pay to the applicant

the sum of
EUR 2 038,61 withheld from his remuneration, plus default
interest at the rate of 8 % per annum from 1 December 2006,
the date of the recovery, until payment in full;

— order the CoR to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of his action, the applicant relies on very similar
pleas in law to those relied on in Case F-59/07 (1).

(1) OJ C 199, 25.8.2007, p. 5.

The applicant maintains,
the administration has
breached the principle of equal treatment and has committed a
manifest error of assessment.

finally,

that

(1) OJ C 281, 12.11.2005, p. 23 (case initially registered before the
Court of First Instance of the European Communities under number
T-302/05 and transferred to the European Union Civil Service
Tribunal by order of 15.12.2005).

Action brought on 3 October 2007 — Cova v Commission

(Case F-101/07)

(2007/C 269/134)

Language of the case: English

Action brought on 1 October 2007 — Tsirimiagos v
Committee of the Regions

Applicant: Philippe Cova (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: S.
Pappas, lawyer)

Parties

(Case F-100/07)

(2007/C 269/133)

Language of the case: French

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Parties

— Annul

the decision of

the Appointing Authority dated
29 June 2007 to the extent that it does not award the
management premium provided for in Article 7(2) of the
staff regulation for a period longer than one year,

Applicant: Kyriakos Tsirimiagos (Kraainem, Belgium) (represented
by: M.-A. Lucas, lawyer)

— Order the European Commission to pay the costs of the

proceedings.

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

Pleas in law and main arguments

The Applicant invokes the following pleas in law:

Form of order sought

— annul the decision of 21 November 2006 of the Administra-
tion Director of the CoR to recover the amounts paid to the
applicant in application of the correction coefficient for that
part of his remuneration transferred to France from April
2004 to May 2005, in the sum of EUR 2 120,16;

— annul, insofar as is necessary, the decision of 21 June 2007,
rejecting his administrative complaint of 21 February 2007
against the decision of 21 November 2006, inasmuch as it
confirms the repayment in the sum of EUR 2 038,61;

1. Infringement of Article 7(2) of the SR by the Appointing

Authority

— the objective of Article 7(2) of the staff regulation is to
ensure smooth continuity of the service in cases of vacancy
of a post; according to the right meaning of this provision,
the temporary occupation of a post should be as short as
possible and for that reason the Administration is urged by
the law to proceed without delay to the termination of the
temporary posting by the nomination of a Head of unit to
the post.