CELEX: 62009TN0368
Language: en
Date: 2009-09-23 00:00:00
Title: Case T-368/09 P: Appeal brought on 23 September 2009 by Roberto Sevenier against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal delivered on 8 July 2009 in Case F-62/08, Sevenier v Commission

21.11.2009   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 282/53
            
         Appeal brought on 23 September 2009 by Roberto Sevenier against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal delivered on 8 July 2009 in Case F-62/08, Sevenier v Commission
   (Case T-368/09 P)
   2009/C 282/101
   Language of the case: French
   
      Parties
   
   
      Appellant: Roberto Sevenier (Paris, France) (represented by E. Boigelot and L. Defalque, lawyers)
   
      Other party to the proceedings: Commission of the European Communities
   
      Form of order sought by the appellant
   
   
               —
            
            
               set aside the order delivered on 8 July 2009 by the Third Chamber of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal in Case F-62/08 Sevenier v Commission, served on the appellant on 13 July 2009;
            
         
               —
            
            
               allow the appellant to rely on his submissions to the European Union Civil Service Tribunal;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the defendant to pay the costs of both instances.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   By the present appeal, the appellant seeks to have set aside the order of the Civil Service Tribunal (CST) of 8 July 2009, delivered in Case F-62/08 Sevenier v Commission, by which the CST dismissed as manifestly inadmissible the action by which the appellant had sought annulment of a decision of the Commission of 24 September 2007 rejecting the appellant’s application, firstly, to retract his offer to resign dated 19 October 1983 and, secondly, for a referral to the invalidity committee.
   In support of his appeal, the appellant submits, principally, a single plea in law alleging an error in law committed by the CST in the interpretation of the concept of a purely confirmatory act, since the CST categorised the express decision, made following the implied rejection of the appellant’s application, as a purely confirmatory act despite the fact that the express decision upheld in part the application made by the appellant.
   In the alternative, the appellant submits that the CST distorted and disregarded documents in the file and failed to fulfil its duty to give reasons by holding that there was no particular fact peculiar to the case which justified the CST not applying the established case-law on purely confirmatory acts.