CELEX: C2006/326/170
Language: en
Date: 2006-12-30 00:00:00
Title: Case F-123/06: Action brought on 23 October 2006 — Timmer v Court of Auditors

30.12.2006   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 326/84
            
         Action brought on 23 October 2006 — Timmer v Court of Auditors
   (Case F-123/06)
   (2006/C 326/170)
   Language of the case: French
   Parties
   
      Applicant: Marianne Timmer (Saint Sauves d'Auvergne, France) (represented by: F. Rollinger, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: European Court of Auditors
   Forms of order sought
   
               —
            
            
               annulment of all the applicant's staff reports drawn up by M.L.;
            
         
               —
            
            
               annulment of the connected and/or subsequent decisions, including that appointing M.L.;
            
         
               —
            
            
               an order for the payment of compensation for the material damage corresponding to the loss of income which the applicant has suffered in relation to the situation she would have been in if she had been promoted each time that she theoretically could have been during the period of her work under M.L.'s orders;
            
         
               —
            
            
               an order for the payment of EUR 250 000 compensation for pain and suffering and for the effects which the unlawful treatment referred to above had on the applicant's health;
            
         
               —
            
            
               an order for the defendant to pay the costs.
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
   In support of her action, the applicant first submits that her career has been hampered, to the point of excluding her from the service, in order to allow her superior to continue in the unlawful exercise of his/her duties. The delay in bringing the action is due to the fact that the applicant learnt that the decisions on her career were unlawful only on the discovery of new facts which affected the validity of her staff reports, namely, in particular: (i) a twofold failure by her superior to observe Article 11a of the Staff Regulations; (ii) that her superior's length of service was insufficient when he/she was appointed; (iii) illegalities in connection with competition CC/LA/18/82; (iv) the unlawful filling of a post that the applicant could have filled; (v) her superiors' personal interest; (vi) the omission of disciplinary measures.
   The applicant also alleges, first, a complete failure to give reasons for the decisions concerning her which were adopted by the General Secretariat of the Court of Auditors and, secondly, illegalities in the disciplinary procedures followed by that that institution.