Case F-71/07: Action brought on 16 July 2007 — Karatzoglou v EAR
Date: 2007-11-10
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European Agency for Reconstruction, action by staff, personnel administration, servant (EU), termination of a contract, work contract

C 269/70

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

10.11.2007

Re:

Application for legal aid.

Operative part of the order

The application for
Commission is dismissed.

legal aid in Case F-12/07 AJ O'Connor v

Action brought on 29 June 2007 — Aayhan and Others v
European Parliament

(Case F-65/07)

(2007/C 269/127)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Laleh Aayhan (Strasbourg. France) and Others (repre-
sented by: R. Blindauer, lawyer)

In support of their action, the applicants plead, first, the unlaw-
fulness of Article 78 of the Conditions of Employment of Other
Servants, inasmuch as that provision excludes the category of
session auxiliaries from the scope of any State or Community
source of law.

The applicants rely, next, on the breach of the principle of non-
in the European Social
in particular,
discrimination as stated,
Charter and in Convention C 111 of the International Labour
Organisation (ILO) concerning discrimination in respect of
employment and occupation. They claim,
the
Parliament infringed the principle requiring any employer to
state reasons for a decision to terminate employment, a prin-
ciple recognised, in particular, in Article 4 of Convention C 158
of the ILO concerning termination of employment at the initia-
tive of the employer.

further,

that

Finally, the applicants submit that, as provided, in particular, by
Directive 1999/70 (1), the general form for the employment
relationship between employers and workers is a contract of an
indefinite duration.

(1) Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 concerning the
framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC,
UNICE and CEEP (OJ 1999 L 175, p. 43).

Defendant: European Parliament

Action brought on 16 July 2007 — Karatzoglou v EAR

Form of order sought

— annul the express decision of the European Parliament of
20 April 2007 rejecting the applicants' complaint of
19 December 2006;

— amend all the fixed-term contracts linking the applicants
and the Parliament by converting them into a single contract
for an indefinite period;

— rule that the Parliament is required to restore to all those
members of staff the benefit of a contract for an indefinite
period;

— rule that members of the auxiliary staff of the Parliament
called ‘session auxiliaries’ are entitled to an allowance repre-
senting the right to paid leave which they acquired through
working for all the work periods since their employment
began;

— order the Parliament to pay to each applicant the sum of
EUR 2 000 for their irrecoverable costs of bringing proceed-
ings;

— order the Parliament to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

(Case F-71/07)

(2007/C 269/128)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Georgios Karatzoglou (Preveza, Greece) (represented
by: S. A. Pappas, lawyer)

Defendant: European Agency for Reconstruction (EAR)

Form of order sought

— Order the EAR to pay the amount of EUR 348 965,96 in
order to compensate the material damage suffered by the
absence of compliance to judgement of the Fourth Chamber
of the Court of First Instance of 23 February 2006 in Case
T-471/04 (Georgios Karatzoglou v European Agency for
Reconstruction) (1);

The applicants are session auxiliary staff employed by the
Parliament at the time of its plenary sessions at Strasbourg, for
12 plenary sessions a year.

— Order the EAR to pay the amount of EUR 100 000 in order
to compensate the non-material damage suffered by the
absence of compliance to judgement T-471/04;

10.11.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 269/71

— Order the EAR to pay the amount of EUR 100 000 in order
to compensate the non-material damage suffered by the
service related fault committed by EAR as it refused to take
any specific measure to comply with judgement T-471/04;

— Order

the EAR to pay interest on the aforementioned
judgement

the publication of

amounts of 3 % since
T-471/04;

the withdrawal of seniority in grade and the requirement of
mobility which was imposed solely on successful candidates;

— consequently, accord the successful candidates the seniority

in grade by annulling the contested acts;

— order the Council to pay the costs.

— Order the EAR to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

applicant mainly

EAR infringed
The
Article 233 EC in so far as it did not
take the necessary
measures to comply with the above-mentioned judgement of
the Court of First Instance.

that The

claims

(1) OJ C 96, of 22.4.2006, p. 13.

The applicants, successful candidates in internal competition
B/277 published on 9 July 2007 by the General Secretariat of
the Council, were first appointed in Category B maintaining the
seniority of grade which they had acquired in Categories C and
D. Later, their seniority in grade was limited to the date of
taking up their new duties, although personnel who had
reached Category B under the attestation procedure and not
because of a competition were able to keep the seniority at
issue. In those circumstances, the applicants rely on the infringe-
ment of the provisions and breach of the principles cited in the
forms of order sought above.

Action brought on 22 August 2007 — Anselmo and Others
v Council

Action brought on 6 September 2007 — Kuchta v
European Central Bank

(Case F-85/07)

(2007/C 269/129)

Language of the case: French

(Case F-89/07)

(2007/C 269/130)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicants: Ana Anselmo (Brussels, Belgium) and Others (repre-
sented by: S. Pappas, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

— annul, first, the decisions of the appointing authority of
11 May 2007, rejecting the complaints brought by the appli-
cants concerning a difference in treatment between, on the
one hand, the successful candidates in internal competition
N/277 and, on the other hand, the officials who benefit
from the attestation procedure as defined by the Council
decision of 2 December 2004 concerning the detailed rules
for implementing the attestation procedure and, secondly,
the decisions contested by those complaints;

— find that

there was an infringement of Article 5(2) of
Annex XIII
the
to the Staff Regulations of Officials of
European Communities by the non-recognition of seniority
in grade in respect of the successful candidates in internal
competition B/277;

— find that there was a breach of the principle of equal treat-
ment and that of sound administration resulting both from

Parties

Applicant:
sented by: B. Karthaus, lawyer)

Jan Kuchta (Frankfurt am Main, Germany)

(repre-

Defendant: European Central Bank

Form of order sought

— order the defendant to pay the applicant damages in the

sum of EUR 1;

— declare

that

the decision addressed to the

applicant
concerning the annual salary and bonus review (ASBR) for
2006 of 31 December 2006 is invalid;

— order the defendant to pay the applicant's out-of-court costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The action concerns an infringement of provisions of data
protection law inasmuch as the applicant's staff report for 2006
was forwarded in full to his new superior without his knowl-
edge.