CELEX: 62009TN0498
Language: en
Date: 2009-12-09 00:00:00
Title: Case T-498/09 P: Appeal brought on 9 December 2009 by Petrus Kerstens against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal delivered on 29 September 2009 in Case F-102/07, Kerstens v Commission

27.2.2010   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 51/35
            
         Appeal brought on 9 December 2009 by Petrus Kerstens against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal delivered on 29 September 2009 in Case F-102/07, Kerstens v Commission
   (Case T-498/09 P)
   2010/C 51/67
   Language of the case: French
   
      Parties
   
   
      Appellant: Petrus Kerstens (Overijse, Belgium) (represented by C. Mourato, lawyer)
   
      Other party to the proceedings: European Commission
   
      Form of order sought by the appellant
   
   
               —
            
            
               Set aside the judgment under appeal;
            
         
               —
            
            
               Refer the case back to the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union;
            
         
               —
            
            
               Order the Commission to pay the costs.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   By this appeal, the appellant requests the Court to set aside the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (CST) of 29 September 2009, delivered in Case F-102/07 Kerstens v Commission, by which the CST dismissed as unfounded an action seeking the annulment of various Commission decisions concerning the award to the applicant of directorate general priority points (PPDG) and/or priority points in recognition of additional tasks carried out in the interests of the institution (PPII) under the 2004, 2005 and 2006 promotion exercises.
   In support of his appeal, the applicant submits two grounds of appeal alleging
   
               —
            
            
               that the CST erred in law in the application of the principle of equal treatment, of Article 5 of the General Provisions for implementing Article 45 of the Staff Regulations and of the criteria laid down by the director of the Office for the Administration and Payment of Individual Entitlements in respect of the award of priority points for the 2005 promotion exercise under the abovementioned provision, and that the evidence was distorted;
            
         
               —
            
            
               that the rights of the defence were not observed in so far as the CST based its decision on an alleged extract from a 2004 Career Development Report which was not produced and could not be challenged by the parties.