CELEX: 62008FA0051(01)
Language: en
Date: 2011-12-13 00:00:00
Title: Case F-51/08 RENV: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 13 December 2011 — Stols v Council (Civil service — Officials — Referral back to the Tribunal after setting aside — Promotion — 2007 promotion exercise — Consideration of comparative merits — Manifest error of assessment — No manifest error — Grounds for the decision — Supererogatory ground — Inoperative plea)

4.2.2012   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 32/43
            
         Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 13 December 2011 — Stols v Council
   (Case F-51/08 RENV) (1)
   
   (Civil service - Officials - Referral back to the Tribunal after setting aside - Promotion - 2007 promotion exercise - Consideration of comparative merits - Manifest error of assessment - No manifest error - Grounds for the decision - Supererogatory ground - Inoperative plea)
   2012/C 32/84
   Language of the case: French
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Willem Stols (Halsteren, Netherlands) (represented by: S. Rodrigues, A. Blot and C. Bernard-Glanz, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer, agent)
   
      Re:
   
   Annulment of the decision of the appointing authority not to include the applicant’s name on the list of officials promoted to grade AST 11 for the 2007 promotion exercise.
   
      Operative part of the judgment
   
   The Tribunal:
   
               1.
            
            
               Dismisses the action brought by Mr Stols;
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Orders Mr Stols to bear his own costs and to pay those of the Council of the European Union in Case F-51/08.
            
         
               3.
            
            
               Orders Mr Stols and the Council of the European Union each to bear their own costs in Case T-175/09 and in the present case.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 183, 19.7.2008, p. 34.