Case F-90/07: Action brought on 17 September 2007 — Traore v Commission
Date: 2007-11-10
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European Commission, action by staff, appointment of staff, professional career, racial discrimination, recruitment, regulations for civil servants

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.