CELEX: C2007/095/72
Language: en
Date: 2007-04-28 00:00:00
Title: Case T-402/03: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 15 March 2007 — Katalagarianakis v Commission (Officials — Appointment — Review of classification in grade and step — Application of the Court's case-law — Articles 5 and 31(2), the second paragraph of Article 32 and Articles 45 and 62 of the Staff Regulations)

28.4.2007   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 95/36
            
         Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 15 March 2007 — Katalagarianakis v Commission
   (Case T-402/03) (1)
   
   (Officials - Appointment - Review of classification in grade and step - Application of the Court's case-law - Articles 5 and 31(2), the second paragraph of Article 32 and Articles 45 and 62 of the Staff Regulations)
   (2007/C 95/72)
   Language of the case: French
   Parties
   
      Applicant: Georgios Katalagarianakis (Overijse, Belgium) (represented by: S. Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis and E. Marchal, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: J. Currall and H. Krämer, Agents)
   Re:
   Application for annulment of the Commission's decision reviewing and fixing the applicant's classification at recruitment at Grade A6, first step, reviewing and fixing his subsequent classification at Grade A5, third step, on 1 April 2000 and fixing the starting point of its pecuniary effects at 5 October 1995.
   Operative part of the judgment
   The Court:
   
               1.
            
            
               Annuls the Commission's decision of 14 April 2003 in so far as it fixes the starting point of its pecuniary effects at 5 October 1995.
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Rules that the Commission is to undertake a comparative examination of the applicant's merits and those of the officials promoted to Grade A5 in each promotion year since 1 May 1993.
            
         
               3.
            
            
               Following that examination and if the Commission should be unable to award the applicant such promotion in grade as may appear justified, invites the parties to seek agreement as to appropriate compensation.
            
         
               4.
            
            
               Rules that the parties are to inform the Court within three months of the delivery of this judgment of the content of any agreement they may have reached, failing which, of their conclusions, with figures, as to the assessment of the loss sustained.
            
         
               5.
            
            
               Dismisses the remainder of the action.
            
         
               6.
            
            
               Reserves the costs.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 35 of 7.2.2004.