CELEX: C2007/129/45
Language: en
Date: 2007-06-09 00:00:00
Title: Case F-33/07: Action brought on 10 April 2007 — Alberto Toronjo Benitez v Commission of the European Communities

9.6.2007   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 129/26
            
         Action brought on 10 April 2007 — Alberto Toronjo Benitez v Commission of the European Communities
   (Case F-33/07)
   (2007/C 129/45)
   Language of the case: French
   Parties
   
      Applicant: Alberto Toronjo Benitez (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: S. Orlandi, J.-N. Louis, A. Coolen and E. Marchal, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: Commission of the European Communities
   Form of order sought
   
               —
            
            
               Declare the unlawfulness of Article 2 of the Commission's decision on the promotion procedure for officials whose remuneration falls under the ‘Research ’credits of the general budget (both in the version of 16 June 2004 and that of 20 July 2005) (‘the first contested decision’);
            
         
               —
            
            
               Annul the Commission's decision to remove the 44.5 points from the applicant's balance which he had accumulated as a temporary agent (‘the second contested decision’);
            
         
               —
            
            
               Order the defendant to pay the costs.
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
   The applicant, who took up his post at the Commission on 16 January 2000 as a temporary agent in the ‘Research ’Directorate-General (‘DG’), was appointed as an official in the same DG with effect from 16 April 2004. On 1 May 2005 he was transferred to DG ‘Relex’. By letter of 16 June 2006, he was informed that the points which he had acquired as a temporary agent had been annulled, by application of the first contested decision, since he had moved to a post falling under the ‘Operational ’part of the general budget before two years had expired following his recruitment as a probationary official to a post falling under the ‘Research ’part of that budget.
   In support of his action, the applicant relies first on infringement of the principles of legal certainty, administrative legality and protection of acquired rights, since the withdrawal by the Appointing Authority (AIPN) of an unlawful decision constituting subjective rights should have taken place within a reasonable time, which is not the case in respect of the second contested decision.
   Furthermore, the applicant submits that Article 2 of the second contested decision is discriminatory against officials whose remuneration falls under the ‘Research ’credits and who apply for a transfer before two years has expired following their recruitment, since those officials lose their points following the transfer whereas officials who are transferred automatically or who occupy posts considered sensitive retain their points.