Case F-107/07: Action brought on 8 October 2007 — Daskalakis v Commission
Date: 2007-12-22
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European Commission, European official, action by staff, bonus payment, pay, personnel administration, regulations for civil servants, temporary employment

C 315/46

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

22.12.2007

Finally, the applicant submits that, in any event, the contested
decisions infringe the general principles of transparency, good
faith and the protection of legitimate expectations.

into consideration not only the interests of the service but also
those of the official concerned.

In a subsidiary manner, the Applicant stresses that he was nomi-
nated Head of Unit ad interim because the compulsory mobility
plan obliged the holder of the post in question to switch to
another post. For this reason, he alleges that its case should be
covered by the last part of Article 7(2) of the Staff Regulations,
according to which the duration of a temporary posting can
exceed one year, where, directly or indirectly, the posting is to
replace an official who is seconded to another post in the inter-
ests of the service.

Action brought on 8 October 2007 — Daskalakis v
Commission

(Case F-107/07)

(2007/C 315/89)

Language of the case: English

Action brought on 16 October 2007 — Doumas v
Commission

Parties

Applicant: Constantin Daskalakis (Brussels, Belgium) (represented
by: S. A. Pappas, lawyer)

(Case F-112/07)

(2007/C 315/90)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Language of the case: French

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Tribunal should:

Parties

— Annul

the decision of

the Appointing Authority dated
28 June 2007 to the extent that it does not award the
management premium provided for in Article 7(2) of the
Staff Regulations for a period longer than one year;

— Order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant, an official called upon to occupy temporarily a
post of Head of Unit, appeals the decision by which the
Commission, when calculating his salary, refused to take into
account the premium that he was granted as Head of Unit ad
interim, on the ground that, according to Article 7(2) of the
Staff Regulations, this premium could be allowed only for one
year, even if the Applicant was still acting as Head of Unit after
that period had expired.

The Applicant claims that the time-limit provided for in the
abovementioned provision refers only to the duration of the
temporary posting and does not affect the remuneration corre-
sponding to it, if the temporary posting is prolonged beyond
if the
the duration of one year. According to the Applicant,
Administration is not able to fill the vacancy in one year,
it
cannot invoke its own failure against the officer occupying the
post ad interim for a longer period.

The applicant alleges, in addition, infringement of the duty to
have regard for the welfare of the officials and of the principle
of good administration. The Commission should have taken

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

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Tribunal should:

— annul

the decision rejecting the applicant's

request of

24 November 2006;

— order the European Commission to pay the applicant the
remuneration which he would have
from
1 November 2003 until 16 September 2007, the date of his
effective reinstatement, as compensation for his material
damage;

received

to increase or diminution in the course of

— order the Commission to pay the applicant EUR 200 000,
subject
the
proceedings, for the damage which he is suffering in terms
of delay in his career and for loss of the chance of making
progress in his career (promotion, step, pension …), and, in
respect of non-material damage, particularly the damage to
his state of health, because of the state of uncertainty as to
the progress of his career for more than three years as a
result of the Appointing Authority's (‘the AIPN’) wrongful
acts or omissions;

— order the Commission to pay the costs.