CELEX: C2005/106/66
Language: en
Date: 2005-04-30 00:00:00
Title: Case T-65/05: Action brought on 7 February 2005 by Thomas Seldis against Commission of the European Communities

30.4.2005   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 106/31
            
         Action brought on 7 February 2005 by Thomas Seldis against Commission of the European Communities
   (Case T-65/05)
   (2005/C 106/66)
   Language of the case: French
   An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 7 February 2005 by Thomas Seldis, residing in Amsterdam (Netherlands), represented by Sébastien Orlandi, Xavier Martin M., Albert Coolen, Jean-Noël Louis and Etienne Marchal, lawyers.
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               1.
            
            
               annul the Commission's decision of 5 April 2004 to appoint the applicant a probationary official in so far as it does not grade him on recruitment at grade A6 and was adopted without considering the possibility of allowing him additional seniority in grade in accordance with Article 32 of the Staff Regulations and Article 4 of the internal directives of 11 October 1984;
            
         
               2.
            
            
               order the Commission to pay the costs.
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
   The applicant in this case objects to his grading as a probationary official in the JRC Directiorate General at grade A7 at the time of his appointment.
   In that regard, he alleges infringement both of Articles 31 and 32 of the Staff Regulations and of the internal directives of 11 October 1984 on the fixing of the grade and step of staff, and more specifically that of officials in the scientific and technical services who occupy posts paid from appropriations in the research budget.
   Having regard to his claims, the applicant maintains inter alia that, at the time of his recruitment as an official, he already had proof of more than eight years of professional experience qualifying for additional seniority.