Case F-147/06: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 4 September 2008 — Dragoman v Commission (Staff case — Open competition — Non-admission to the oral test)
Date: 2008-09-04
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment (EU), competition (EU), recruitment

6.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 313/55

EUROPEAN UNION CIVIL SERVICE TRIBUNAL

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber)
of 9 October 2008 — Nijs v Court of Auditors

(Case F-49/06) (1)

Defendant: European Police Office (Europol)
(represented by:
Urban and D. Neumann and, subsequently, by D. Neumann and
D. El Khoury, Agents, and B. Wägenbaur and R. van der Hout,
lawyers)

(Staff case — Officials — Promotion — 2005 promotion
procedure)

Re:

(2008/C 313/97)

Language of the case: French

Annulment of the Europol decision of 5 July 2006 to grant the
applicant only one of the two incremental points provided for
in Article 29 of the Staff Regulations of Europol.

Parties

Applicant: Bart Nijs (Bereldange, Luxembourg) (represented by:
F. Rollinger, lawyer)

Defendant: Court of Auditors of
(represented by: T. Kennedy,
Agents)

the European Communities
J.-M. Stenier and G. Corstens,

Re:

First, annulment of the decision of the appointing authority not
to promote the applicant to grade A*11 pursuant to the 2005
promotion procedure and, second, a claim for damages.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

1. Dismisses the action as partly inadmissible and partly unfounded;

2. Orders Mr Nijs to pay all the costs.

(1) OJ C 154, 1.7.2006, p. 26.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 326, 30.12.2006, p. 84.

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber)
of 4 September 2008 — Dragoman v Commission

(Case F-147/06) (1)

(Staff case — Open competition — Non-admission to the oral
test)

(2008/C 313/99)

Language of the case: French

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber)
of 11 September 2008 — Spee v Europol

Parties

(Case F-121/06) (1)

(Staff case — Members of the Europol staff — Remuneration
— Articles 28 and 29 of the Europol Staff Regulations —
Incremental points awarded on the basis of an assessment —
Retroactive application of rules — Calculation method)

Applicant: Adriana Dragoman (Brussels, Belgium)
(represented
by: S. Mihailescu, and, subsequently, by G.-F. Dinulescu, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: K. Herrmann and M. Velardo, Agents)

(2008/C 313/98)

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Applicant: David Spee (Rijswijk, Netherlands) (represented by: D.
C. Coppens, lawyer)

Re:

Annulment of the decision of the selection board for open
competition EPSO/AD/44/06 CJ, made for the purpose of estab-
lishing a reserve list for the recruitment of Romanian-language
lawyer-linguists, to award the applicant a mark of 18/40 in
written test (b) and not to admit her to the oral test for that
competition

C 313/56

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

6.12.2008

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 42, 24.2.2007, p. 48.

3. Orders the Commission of the European Communities to bear its

own costs and to pay half of Mr Lafili's costs.

(1) OJ C 95, 28.4.2007, p. 59.

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of
8 October 2008 — Barbin v European Parliament

(Case F-44/07) (1)

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber)
of 4 September 2008 — Lafili v Commission

(Case F-22/07) (1)

(Staff cases — Officials — Promotion — Procedure for the
allocation of merit points in the European Parliament — Illeg-
ality of the instructions governing that procedure — Examina-
tion of comparative merits)

(Staff case — Officials — Entry into force of Regulation
(EEC, Euratom) No 723/2004 — Articles 44 and 46 of the
Staff Regulations — Article 7 of Annex XIII to the Staff
Regulations — Promotion — Grading — Multiplication
factor)

(2008/C 313/101)

Language of the case: French

(2008/C 313/100)

Language of the case: French

Parties

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

Parties

Applicant:
G. Vandersanden and L. Levi, lawyers)

Lafili

Paul

(Genk, Belgium)

(represented

by:

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: A. Lukošiūtė
and R. Ignătescu, later by C. Burgos, A. Lukošiūtė and R. Ignă-
tescu, agents)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: J. Currall, H. Kraemer and K. Herrmann, Agents)

Re:

Re:

Annulment of
the decision to place the applicant in Grade
AD 13, step 5, contained in a memorandum from DG ADMIN
of 11 May 2006 and in the pay slip of June 2006 and in subse-
quent pay slips, inasmuch as that the decision infringes, inter
alia, Articles 44 and 46 of the Staff Regulations of Officials and
Article 7 of Annex XIII to those regulations.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

1. Annuls the decision of the Head of Unit A 6 ‘Career structure,
evaluation and promotion’
in the ‘Personnel and Administration’
General-Directorate of the Commission of the European Commu-
nities of 11 May 2006;

2. Orders Mr Lafili to bear half his own costs;

point

one merit

First, annulment of the decision of 16 September 2006 to allo-
cate
the
2005 promotion procedure and, secondly, for a declaration that
paragraph I.2(c) of the ‘Implementing measures relating to the
allocation of merit and promotion points’ of
the European
Parliament of 10 May 2006 is illegal.

applicant

under

the

to

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

1. dismisses the application;

2. orders the parties to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 155 of 7.7.2007, p. 45.