CELEX: C2007/223/27
Language: en
Date: 2007-09-22 00:00:00
Title: Case T-293/07 P: Appeal brought on 3 August 2007 by Alessandro Lofaro against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal delivered on 24 May 2007 in Joined Cases F-27/06 and F-75/06, Lofaro v Commission

22.9.2007   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 223/16
            
         Appeal brought on 3 August 2007 by Alessandro Lofaro against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal delivered on 24 May 2007 in Joined Cases F-27/06 and F-75/06, Lofaro v Commission
   (Case T-293/07 P)
   (2007/C 223/27)
   Language of the case: French
   Parties
   
      Appellant: Alessandro Lofaro (Lisbon, Portugal) (represented by: J.-L. Laffineur, lawyer)
   
      Other party to the proceedings: Commission of the European Communities
   Form of order sought by the appellant
   
               —
            
            
               declare the appeal admissible and well founded and, accordingly,
            
         
               —
            
            
               set aside the order of the Civil Service Tribunal in Cases F-27/06 and 75/06 delivered on 24 May 2007;
            
         
               —
            
            
               rule on the merits and uphold the appellant's original application.
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
   In his appeal, the appellant claims that the Civil Service Tribunal erred in law in its interpretation of Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations and, in particular, as regards the period laid down for lodging the complaint and the date to be taken into account for the expiry of that period. The appellant claims that the Tribunal's interpretation prejudices general principles of Community law, such as the principle of legal certainty, of non-discrimination and of proportionality, as well as the rights of the appellant. He further submits that the Tribunal did not respond to all the pleas put forward by him in his actions and that, accordingly, the order is vitiated by a defective statement of reasons which is inadequate and incorrect.