CELEX: C1995/248/33
Language: en
Date: 1995-09-23 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 5 July 1995 by Jean-Louis Delvaux against the Commission of the European Communities (Case T-142/95)

23 . 9 . 95            EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                 No C 248/ 15
   Action brought on 5 July 1995 by Jean-Louis Delvaux                Lastly, he considers that the promotion procedure
   against the Commission of the European Communities                 established by the Commission in the Translation Service is
                        ( Case T-142/95 )                             contrary to Articles 5 ( 3 ) and 27 of the Staff Regulations, in
                                                                      so far as, first, it does not secure for the institution the
                          ( 95/C 248/33 )
                                                                      services of officials of the highest standard of ability,
                                                                      efficiency and integrity, and, secondly, it does not guarantee
                                                                      identical conditions of service career .
                 (Language of the case: French)
                                                                      As regards the claim for damages, the applicant states that
An action against the Commission of the European                      the irregularity of the promotion procedure for 1994 caused
 Communities was brought before the Court of First                    his unjustified exclusion from the list of officials considered
Instance on 5 July 1995 by Jean-Louis Delvaux, resident in            the most deserving of promotion and also, possibly, from
Rhode-St. Genese ( Belgium), represented by Nicolas Lhoest,           the list of officials promoted; he maintains that he has
 of the Brussels Bar, with an address for service in                  suffered ascertainable damage linked to the loss of a chance
 Luxembourg c/o Ann Branch, 39 , Avenue Victor Hugo .                 of promotion in 1994, which could in particular have led to
                                                                      a higher salary, the right to a higher pension and the right to
                                                                      apply for A 3 posts .
 The applicant claims that the Court should :
 — annul the Commission's decision, which appeared in
      Informations administratives No 858 of 2 September
      1994 , not to include the applicant's name on the list of
      officials considered the most deserving of promotion to
      Grade LA 4 in 1994,
                                                                      Action brought on 7 July 1995 by Christos Michael against
                                                                             the Commission of the European Communities
 — annul the Commission's decision, which appeared in
                                                                                              ( Case T-144/95 )
      Informations administratives No 859 of 8 September
      1994, not to include the applicant's name on the list of                                  ( 95/C 248/34 )
      officials considered the most deserving of promotion to
      Grade LA 4 in 1994,
                                                                                      (Language of the case: French)
 — if necessary, annul the express decision of rejection
      adopted by the Commission on 3 April 1995 in reply to            An action against the Commission of the European
      the applicant's complaint;                                       Communities was brought before the Court of First
                                                                       Instance on 7 July 1995 by Christos Michael, resident in
 — order the defendant to pay a lump sum of Bfrs 100 000               Brussels, represented by Lucas Vogel, of the Brussels Bar,
      as compensation for the irregularity of the promotion            with an adress for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers
      procedure which caused harm to the applicant,                    of Christian Kremer, 8—10 Rue Mathias Hardt.
 — order the defendant to pay all the costs .                          The applicant claims that the Court should :
                                                                       — annul the implied decision, considered to have been
  Fleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                      taken on 7 April 1995 , rejecting the complaint made on
                                                                           7 December 1994 by the applicant to the appointing
  The applicant relies, first, on breach of Article 46 of the Staff        authority challenging the decision on promotions to
  Regulations of Officials, claiming that the appointing                   Grade A 4 for 1994 ( decision published in Informations
  authority did not carry out a comparative examination of                 administratives of 8 September 1994 );
  the merits and staff reports of all promotable officials and
' also that it did not take into account all the applicant's           — oder the defendant to pay the costs .
  merits, in particular those acquired outside his linguistic
  unit . In addition he maintains that in the course of the
  promotion procedure he was the subject of criticism , in              Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
  conditions contrary to Article 26 of the Staff Regulations, to
  which he could not respond and which played a determinant
                                                                        The applicant alleges infringement of the principle of
  role in his being excluded from the list of officials proposed        non-discrimination and of Article 45 ( 1 ) of the Staff
  for promotion.
                                                                        Regulations , as well as of the implementing provisions
                                                                        contained in the Commission's Decision of 21 December
  The applicant points out, furthermore, that the contested             1970 , amended by Decision of 14 July 1971 , inasmuch as
   decisions are vitiated by the complete absence of a statement        the appointing authority did not undertake a 'consideration
   of the grounds on which they were based, in breach of the            of the comparative merits of the officials eligible for
   second paragraph of Article 25 of the Staff Regulations .            promotion and of the reports on them'.