CELEX: C1999/226/76
Language: en
Date: 1999-08-07 00:00:00
Title: Case T-138/99: Action brought on 8 June 1999 by Luc Verheyden against the Commission of the European Communities

7.8.1999               EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                         C 226/43
By decision of 8 August 1997, the director of CEDEFOP                    The applicant claims that the Court should:
adopted the applicant’s transfer to CEDEFOP to an English-
language translator post with effect from 1 September 1997.
                                                                         — Annul the implied rejection of the request submitted by
                                                                              the applicant on 23 March 1998, registered on 26 March
Following his transfer the applicant noticed that CEDEFOP had                 1998, in which he requested the appointing authority to
not, contrary to the requirements of Article 5(2), set up, for                promote him to Grade A4 with step calculated in accord-
posts of translators and interpreters, a Language Service within              ance with the Staff Regulations;
category A, so that he was thus transferred by the decision of
8 August 1997 from an LA 6 post at the European Parliament               — Annul the decision not to promote the applicant to Grade
to an A 6 post at CEDEFOP. Accordingly, the applicant                         A4 with step calculated in accordance with the Staff
submitted a request to the director of CEDEFOP asking him to                  Regulations with retroactive effect from 10 October 1989
comply with Article 5(2) of the Staff Regulations or, if it                   in the 1998 promotion exercise, which followed from the
transpires that, following his transfer, he was appointed to a                exclusion of his name from the list of officials eligible for
post within the Language Service, that the director should state              promotion published in Administrative Notices No 1045
this clearly in writing. The applicant received neither a formal              of 3 August 1998;
reply to that request nor a reply to the complaint which
followed it.
                                                                         — Annul the decision expressly rejecting the two complaints
                                                                              brought by the applicant, registered on 28 October 1998
The applicant claims that:                                                    and 5 November 1998, against the above decisions, which
                                                                              was notified to the applicant on 8 March 1999 and taken
                                                                              by Commissioner Liikanen on 24 February 1999;
— the contested decisions infringe the second sentence of the
    second paragraph of Article 25 of the Staff Regulations
    inasmuch as they do not state the grounds on which they              — Pay, as compensation for non-pecuniary damage, the sum
    are based. Furthermore. in the applicant’s view, the mere                 of BEF 500 000 (EUR 12 394.68) together with interest at
    fact that the contested decisions are implied rejections is               8 % per annum from the date of judgment until payment
    contrary to the undertakings formally made by the director                in full;
    of CEDEFOP;
                                                                         — Order the defendant to pay the costs.
— contrary to Article 5(2) of the Staff Regulations, CEDEFOP
    has not fulfilled its obligation to set up a Language Service
    within category A; and
                                                                         Pleas in law and main arguments
— the decision of CEDEFOP’s appointing authority not to set
    up such a service constitutes misuse of powers.
                                                                         The applicant, who entered the service of the Commission on
                                                                         1 April 1964, was promoted to Grade A5 on 1 January 1977.
                                                                         By letter of 23 March 1998 the applicant submitted a request
                                                                         for promotion to Grade A4.
                                                                         In support of his application, the applicant claims breach of:
                                                                         — Articles 25, second paragraph, 43 and 45 of the Staff
                                                                              Regulations, and
Action brought on 8 June 1999 by Luc Verheyden against
      the Commission of the European Communities
                                                                         — the principle of equal concern for welfare and protection
                                                                              of legitimate expectations and the principle that all admin-
                         (Case T-138/99)                                      istrative decisions must be based on reasoning which is
                                                                              legal and relevant, that is to say, lawful, admissible and free
                                                                              from manifest errors of law or fact.
                         (1999/C 226/76)
                                                                         According to the applicant, the appointing authority mani-
                                                                         festly took account neither of his merits nor of his extraordi-
                   (Language of the case: French)                        nary seniority in grade, putting him in a completely abnormal
                                                                         administrative position, both with respect to a classic career
                                                                         open to any official in a situation identical with or comparable
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-                to his, and with respect to his objective expectations and
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the               merits.
European Communities on 8 June 1999 by Luc Verheyden,
residing in Angera, Italy, represented by Eric Boigelot, of the
Brussels Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the
Chambers of Louis Schiltz, 2 Rue du Fort Rheinsheim.