CELEX: C2007/056/84
Language: en
Date: 2007-03-10 00:00:00
Title: Case F-5/07: Action brought on 21 January 2007 — Nijs v Court of Auditors

10.3.2007   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 56/44
            
         Action brought on 21 January 2007 — Nijs v Court of Auditors
   (Case F-5/07)
   (2007/C 56/84)
   Language of the case: French
   Parties
   
      Applicant: Bart Nijs (Bereldange, Belgium) (represented by: F. Rollinger, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: European Court of Auditors
   Form of order sought
   
               —
            
            
               annul the Appointing Authority's decision to appoint the applicant's superior to his current post;
            
         
               —
            
            
               annul the result, so far as it concerns the applicant, of competition CC/LA/1/99 and all connected and/or subsequent decisions;
            
         
               —
            
            
               annul the decision of the polling office of the Court Auditors to reject the applicant's challenge to the ballot of 2, 3, and 4 May 2006;
            
         
               —
            
            
               annul the result of the Court Auditors' Staff Committee elections of 2, 3 and 4 May 2006 and all connected and subsequent decisions;
            
         
               —
            
            
               annul the decisions not to promote the applicant, and to promote Mr X, in 2006;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the payment of compensation for the material and non-material loss suffered by the applicant;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the defendant to pay the costs.
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
   In support of his action, the applicant argues, inter alia, that: (i) the Appointing Authority's decisions were vitiated by a failure to give relevant reasons; (ii) the Secretary General of the Court of Auditors acted unlawfully in his capacity as Appointing Authority when he rejected the applicant's complaints, inasmuch as he had a personal interest such as to impair his independence; (iii) the Appointing Authority has performed its duties unlawfully since 1984; (iv) the applicant's superior performed his duties unlawfully; in breach inter alia of Article 7 and Article 11a (ex Article 14) of the Staff Regulations; (v) competition CC/LA/1/99 was prejudiced by a number of illegalities, for which there is new evidence; (vi) the 2006 Staff Committee elections are unlawful on a number of grounds; (vii) the promotion of Mr X stems from the interest of the applicant's hierarchical superior in obstructing the applicant's career.