natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
With regard to the other seven posts, the Commission informed Ms Girardot, by letter of 13 March 2001, that her application ‘[could] not be taken into consideration’ on the ground that those posts ‘[were] available only to staff covered by the Staff Regulations in the service of the Commission who were successful candidates in a competition’.
Glede drugih sedmih delovnih mest je Komisija v dopisu z dne 13. marca 2001 M.-C. Girardot obvestila, da ni mogla upo�tevati njene prijave, ker so ta delovna mesta dostopna samo za uslužbence Komisije, ki so uspe�no opravili natečaj.
For each post the Commission accepted the application of seven other candidates, all of whom were members of the temporary staff and appeared on the list drawn up following ‘internal reserve competition’ COM/T/R/ST/A/2000, and appointed each of them to the post in which they had expressed an interest.
Za vsako delovno mesto je Komisija prejela prijave sedmih drugih kandidatov, ki so bili vsi začasni uslužbenci in ki so bili na seznamu, narejenem po koncu notranjega natečaja za oblikovanje rezervnega seznama COM/T/R/ST/A/2000, ter vsakega od njih imenovala na delovno mesto, za katero so se potegovali.
On 8 June 2001, Ms Girardot lodged a complaint against the decisions rejecting her application which were contained in those two letters.
M.-C. Girardot je 8. junija 2001 vložila pritožbo zoper odločitve iz teh dveh dopisov, da se njena prijava zavrže. Ta pritožba je bila z molkom organa zavrnjena.
The Court of First Instance nonetheless dismissed Ms Girardot’s claims for annulment of the decisions appointing the successful candidates to the posts in question.
Sodi�če prve stopnje pa je zavrnilo predloge M.-C. Girardot o razglasitvi odločitve o imenovanju kandidatov, ki so bili sprejeti na navedena delovna mesta, za nične.
4After weighing up the interests of Ms Girardot, the service and the thirdparties appointed, ‘as required by the principles of proportionality and of protection of legitimate expectations’, the Court of First Instance took the view that annulment of the decisions making appointments to the posts in question would constitute an excessive penalty for the unlawful act, committed by the Commission, of failing to establish that it had duly considered the merits of a single candidate for those posts. 5
4Po pretehtanju interesov M.-C. Girardot, službe in tretjih oseb, ki so bile imenovane, je Sodi�če prve stopnje „v skladu z načeloma sorazmernosti in varstva zaupanja v pravo“ presodilo, da bi razglasitev odločitev o imenovanju na navedena delovna mesta za nične pomenila pretirano sankcijo za nezakonitost ravnanja Komisije, ki ni dokazala, da je ustrezno obravnavala uspe�nost ene kandidatke za navedena delovna mesta. 5
III — The interim judgment of the Court of First Instance
III – Vmesna sodba Sodišča prve stopnje
Nevertheless, the Court of First Instance pointed out that the Community judicature may, in order to ensure that the annulling judgment has a practical effect in the appli-
Vendar je Sodi�če prve stopnje opozorilo, da lahko sodi�če Skupnosti, zato da zagotovi polni učinek sodbe o razglasitvi ničnosti v dobro tožeče stranke, ravna v okviru pristoj-
3 — Paragraphs 65 to 71 and 78 to 80 of the interim judgment.4 — Interim judgment paragraph 88.5 — Ibid. (paragraphs 85 to 87).
3 – Točke od 65 do 71 in od 78 do 80 omenjene sodbe.4 – Vmesna sodba (točka 88).5 – Prav tam (točke od 85 do 87).
By its interim judgment, the Court of First Instance annulled the Commission’s decisions rejecting Ms Girardot’s application, on the ground that it had not been established that the Commission had duly considered the merits of the person concerned before
Sodi�če prve stopnje je z vmesno sodbo za nične razglasilo odločitve Komisije, s katerimi je ta zavrgla prijavo M.-C. Girardot, z obrazložitvijo, da ni bilo dokazano, da je Komisija ustrezno obravnavala uspe�nost kandidatke, preden je zavrgla njeno
IV — The judgment under appeal cant’s interests, use the unlimited jurisdiction conferred on it in proceedings concerning financial matters and, if need be, of its own motion, order the defendant institution to pay compensation, 6or request that institution to provide adequate protection for the applicant’s rights.
IV – Izpodbijana sodba nosti za odločanje v sporu polne jurisdikcije, ki jo ima v sporih premoženjske narave, in tudi po uradni dolžnosti toženi instituciji naloži plačilo od�kodnine 6ali to institucijo pozove, da ustrezno zavaruje pravice tožeče stranke.
Since they were unable to reach an agreement on fair financial compensation, the parties sent the Court of First Instance their submissions on the quantum of damages on 6 September 2004.
Ker strankama ni uspelo skleniti dogovora o primerni denarni od�kodnini, sta 6. septembra 2004 Sodi�ču prve stopnje posredovali svoje predloge o zneskih.
Ms Girardot proposed that the amount of that compensation be set at EUR 2 687 994 or, in the alternative, at EUR 432 887 and, in the further alternative, at EUR 250 248, with legal interest.
M.-C. Girardot je primarno predlagala, da se za od�kodnino določi znesek 2,687.994 EUR, podredno 432.887 EUR in �e bolj podredno 250.248 EUR, skupaj z zakonitimi obrestmi.
In the present case, the Court of First Instance requested the parties to seek an agreement setting fair financial compensation for the unlawful rejection of Ms Girardot’s application, which was to take into account the fact that the person concerned would no longer be able to take part in a future procedure, since she was neither in a position nor entitled to express her interest in vacant posts by responding to specific ‘research’ vacancy notices.
V tem primeru je Sodi�če prve stopnje stranki pozvalo, naj poskusita najti dogovor o primerni denarni od�kodnini za nezakonito zavrženje prijave M.-C. Girardot, ki naj upo�teva dejstvo, da tožeča stranka ni mogla več sodelovati v naslednjih postopkih, ker ni bila niti sposobna niti upravičena, da se poteguje za delovna mesta z odgovorom na objavo prostih delovnih mest z oznako „spécial recherche“.
In the absence of such an agreement, the Court of First Instance stated that the parties must present to it their submissions, with figures, within a period of three months of delivery of the interim judgment.
Sodi�če prve stopnje je pojasnilo, da bi mu morali stranki v primeru, če dogovora ne bi sklenili, poslati svoje predloge o zneskih v treh mesecih od izreka vmesne sodbe.
6 — Ibid. (paragraph 89).
6 – Prav tam (točka 89).
The Court of First Instance refers in that regard to Case 24/79 Oberthür v Commission [1980] ECR 1743, paragraph 14.
Sodi�če prve stopnje se v zvezi s tem sklicuje na sodbo Sodi�ča z dne 5. junija 1980 v zadevi Oberthür proti Komisiji (24/79, Recueil, str. 1743, točka 14).
See also Case 44/59 Fiddelaar v Commission [1960] ECR 535 and Joined Cases 176/86 and 177/86 Houyouxand Guery v Commission [1987] ECR 4333, paragraph 16.
1077) in z dne 27. oktobra 1987 v združenih zadevah Houyoux in Guery proti Komisiji (176/86 in 177/86, Recueil, str. 4333, točka 16).
It should be noted that, in the present case, Ms Girardot did not in fact claim compensation for the damage caused by the alleged unlawful act committed by the Commission.
Opozoriti je treba, da M.-C. Girardot v tem primeru dejansko ni zahtevala nadomestila �kode, ki ji je bila povzročena z zatrjevanim nezakonitim ravnanjem Komisije.
It should also be pointed out that the interim judgment seems to form part of a minority line of caselaw as regards matters relating to the appointment or recruitment procedure, in that it adopts the approach of compensating the applicant rather than annulling both the decision rejecting the latter’s application and that appointing or recruiting a third party.
Prav tako je treba pojasniti, da se vmesna sodba uvr�ča v manj�inski tok sodne prakse na področju postopkov imenovanja in zaposlovanja z izbiro od�kodninske re�itve v prid tožeče stranke namesto razglasitve za nično odločitev o zavrženju njene prijave in tiste o imenovanju ali zaposlitvi tretjih oseb.
7 — Paragraph 45 of the judgment under appeal.
7 – Izpodbijana sodba (točka 45).
COMMISSION v GIRARDOT interest payable between the date of delivery of the interim judgment and the date of actual payment of the sum payable, together with nominal damages of one Euro as compensation for the nonmaterial damage.
KOMISIJA PROTI GIRARDOT za kompenzacijske obresti za obdobje od izreka vmesne sodbe do dejanskega plačila dolgovanega zneska, pa tudi za simbolični euro kot od�kodnino za nepremoženjsko �kodo.
8 point on which the parties agreed. 10 Finally, the Court of First Instance stated, in paragraphs 57 and 58 of the judgment under appeal, that, for the purposes of assessing the extent of the damage arising from the loss of an opportunity, which is in dispute between the parties to the present case, it was appropriate to ‘determine the difference between the earnings which Ms Girardot would have received in the event that her opportunity of having her application accepted had materialised and those which she actually received following the unlawful rejection of her application, and then, if appropriate, to assess, as a percentage, the chance that Ms Girardot had of that eventuality materialising’.
8 točkah 57 in 58 sodbe razložilo, da je treba za oceno obsega �kode zaradi izgube možnosti, o čemer teče spor med strankama v tem primeru, „ugotoviti razliko med plačilom, ki bi ga M.-C. prejemala, če bi bila njena prijava sprejeta, in plačilom, ki ga je dejansko prejemala po nezakonitem zavrženju njene prijave, ter, če je to ustrezno, oceniti v obliki odstotkov možnosti, ki jih je imela M.-C. Girardot, da se uresniči navedena hipoteza“.
In the judgment under appeal, the Court of First Instance set the amount of financial compensation payable by the Commission to Ms Girardot at EUR 92 785, together with interest payable from 6 September 2004, at the rate set by the European Central Bank for main refinancing operations, plus two percentage points and ordered the Commission to pay the costs.
Sodi�če prve stopnje je v izpodbijani sodbi na eni strani določilo znesek de -narne od�kodnine, ki ga Komisija dolguje M.-C. Girardot, na 92.785 EUR skupaj z obrestmi, ki tečejo od 6. septembra 2004 dalje s stopnjo, ki jo je Evropska centralna banka določila za operacije glavnega refinanciranja, povi�ano za dve točki, ter na drugi strani naložilo Komisiji plačilo stro�kov.
Before setting out the method used to calculate that amount, the Court of First Instance first recalled that the Commission’s decisions, annulled by the interim judgment, deprived, in a certain and irreversible manner, in view of the impossibility of restoration of the situation existing prior to their adoption, the person concerned of the possibility of having her applications examined and of having one of them accepted.
Preden je Sodi�če prve stopnje pojasnilo podrobnosti izračuna tega zneska, je opozorilo, da so odločitve Komisije, ki jih je vmesna sodba razglasila za nične, M.-C. Girardot gotovo in dokončno odvzele možnost, da bi bile njene različne prijave obravnavane in da bi bila ena od njih sprejeta, glede na to, da je nemogoče obnoviti položaj pred sprejetjem odločitev.
9 It then ruled that the loss of an opportunity to fill a vacant post within a Community institution and to enjoy the financial benefits attaching thereto constitutes material damage, a
9 Nato je pojasnilo, da izguba možnosti zapolnitve prostega delovnega mesta v okviru institucije Skupnosti ter možnosti kori�čenja s tem povezanih denarnih ugodnosti pomeni �kodo premoženjske narave, o čemer sta se stranki sporazumeli. 10 Sodi�če prve stopnje je nazadnje v
Moving on to the specific assessment of financial compensation in the present case, the Court of First Instance first calculated the difference between the earnings under the financial terms of employment which Ms Girardot would have enjoyed if she had been recruited by the Commission and those which she actually enjoyed, on the basis of the net amounts after tax.
Pri konkretni oceni denarne od�kodnine v tem primeru je Sodi�če prve stopnje najprej izračunalo razliko v plačilu, ki izhaja iz finančnih pogojev delovnega mesta, ki bi veljali za M.-C. Girardot, če bi jo Komisija zaposlila, in tistimi, ki so dejansko veljali zanjo, ter pri tem upo�tevalo razliko med neto zneski po plačilu davkov.
11 With regard in particular to the period in respect of which that comparison ought to be carried out, the Court of First Instance took the view that, in order to take account of all the possibilities of termination of employment provided for in Articles 47(2), 48, 49 and 50 of the Conditions of Employment, that period could be determined ex aequo et bono at five years, including the period of notice, from the date of taking effect of the appointment of the candidates accepted by the Commission
11Glede obdobja, za katero naj bi se opravila ta primerjava, je Sodi�če prve stopnje ocenilo, da se lahko ob upo�tevanju vseh možnosti konca zaposlitve, ki so predvidene v členih 47(2) in od 48 do 50 PZDU, za navedeno obdobje ex æquo et bono določi petletno obdobje, vključno z odpovednim rokom od datuma, ko so začela veljati imenovanja kandidatov, ki jih je Komisija potrdila ob koncu postopka zapolnitve delovnih mest, iz katerega je bila M.-C. nezakonito izločena, to je obdobje od 1. aprila
8 — Ibid. (paragraphs 46 and 47).9 — Ibid. (paragraph 54).
8 – Prav tam (točki 46 in 4).9 – Prav tam (točka 54).10 – Prav tam (točka 56).
10 — Ibid. (paragraph 56).11 — Ibid. (paragraphs 60 and 83 to 95).
11 – Prav tam (točke 60 in od 83 do 95).
In that connection, and having regard to the documents in the court file, the Court of First Instance points out that it is not possible to take the view that, at the end of the first stage of the procedure for filling vacant posts provided for by Article 29(1) of the Staff Regulations, the Commission, which indeed may prefer to widen its choice, would definitely have accepted one of the applications of Ms Girardot and, consequently, that the latter had every chance of being awarded a contract as a member of the temporary staff within the meaning of Article 2(d) of the Conditions of Employment and of obtaining the financial advantages attaching to its performance.
V zvezi s tem in glede na podatke v spisu je Sodi�če prve stopnje ugotovilo, da ni mogoče izhajati iz tega, da bi Komisija, ki bi seveda gotovo raje imela večjo izbiro, po koncu prve faze postopka zasedbe prostih delovnih mest, določene v členu 29(1) Kadrovskih predpisov, zagotovo sprejela eno od prijav M.-C. Girardot in da bi ta temu ustrezno dobila pogodbo o zaposlitvi začasnega uslužbenca v smislu člena 2(d) PZDU ter koristila denarne ugodnosti njenega izvr�evanja.
The Court of First Instance nonetheless considered that Ms Girardot had been deprived of a genuine opportunity as a result of the rejection of her applications, without proof of examination, by the Commission. 16
Sodi�če prve stopnje je kljub temu menilo, da je imela M.-C. Girardot resno možnost, ki ji je bila odvzeta, ker je Komisija njene prijave zavrgla, ne da bi jih preučila. 16
Secondly, with regard to the assessment, as a percentage, of Ms Girardot’s chance of having her application accepted, the Court of First Instance first considered whether the applications which she had submitted satisfied the conditions prescribed for being taken into consideration by the vacancy notices to which she had responded, in order to ensure that the opportunity denied to her was to be regarded as genuine.
Drugič, v okviru ocene možnosti M.-C. Girardot v obliki odstotka, da bi bila njena prijava sprejeta, je Sodi�če prve stopnje najprej preverilo, ali prijave, ki jih je vložila, izpolnjujejo vse zahtevane pogoje, da bi bile upo�tevane v okviru objav prostih delovnih mest, na katere je odgovorila, da bi se prepričali, ali je bila možnost, ki je bila M.-C. Girardot odvzeta, realna.
13In that connection, the Court of First Instance pointed out that, according to the interim judgment, this was indeed the case. 14
13Sodi�če prve stopnje je v zvezi s tem v vmesni sodbi odgovorilo pritrdilno. 14
By subsequently weighing up additional factors capable of reducing Ms Girardot’s chance of having her application accepted and others capable of increasing that chance, 17the Court of First Instance concluded that Ms Girardot ‘had in the final analysis a genuine chance of acceptance of her application to fill one of the posts in which she had expressed an interest or any
Nazadnje je Sodi�če prve stopnje ob tehtanju dodatnih dejavnikov, ki bi lahko zmanj�ali oziroma povečali možnosti, da bi bila kandidatura M.-C. Girardot sprejeta, 17presodilo, da je M.-C. Girardot „zagotovo imela resno možnost, da bi bila njena prijava za eno od delovnih mest, za katera se je potegovala, ali za vsako drugo delovno mesto,
16 — Ibid. (paragraph 115).
16 – Prav tam (točka 115).
Thirdly, the Court of First Instance examined whether the opportunity denied to Ms Girardot could be regarded as certain, inasmuch as the person concerned would have had, if not every chance of being recruited to one of the posts in question, at least a genuine chance of being recruited to it. 15
Tretjič, Sodi�če prve stopnje je preučilo, ali se lahko možnost, ki je bila M.-C. Girardot odvzeta, �teje za gotovo v smislu, da bi imela resne možnosti za zaposlitev na enem od zadevnih delovnih mest, če ne že vseh možnosti. 15
17 — See, respectively, paragraphs 116 and 117 of the judgment under appeal.
17 – Glej točki 116 in 117 izpodbijane sodbe.
As regards the first factors, the Court of First Instance pointed out that the genuine chance identified in paragraph 115 of the judgment under appeal was reduced by the fact that another candidate had expressed his interest in each of the eight posts, in accordance with Article 29(1)(b) of the Staff Regulations, and that the Commission could therefore have accepted one of those candidates or even accepted none of the applications and ended the procedure.
Glede zmanj�anja možnosti je Sodi�če prve stopnje ugotovilo, da je resna možnost, ugotovljena v točki 115 izpodbijane sodbe, zmanj�ana, ker se je �e eden kandidat potegoval za vseh osem delovnih mest v skladu s členom 29(1)(b) Kadrovskih predpisov in bi tako lahko Komisija sprejela enega ali drugega kandidata ali celo nobenega in ne bi nadaljevala postopka.
As regards the second factors, the Court of First Instance considered that if Ms Girardot had been entitled to take part in a new procedure for filling vacant posts, organised following the annulment of the decisions rejecting her application, she could reasonably have expressed her interest in posts of the same kind and, possibly, been selected.
Glede izbolj�anja možnosti je Sodi�če prve stopnje upo�tevalo, da če bi bila M.-C. Girardot upravičena sodelovati v novem postopku zapolnitve prostih delovnih mest, ki bi bil organiziran po razglasitvi odločitev o zavrženju njene prijave za nične, bi se lahko ustrezno potegovala za delovna mesta iste vrste in eventualno bila sprejeta.
12 — Ibid. (paragraphs 78 and 82).13 — Ibid. (paragraph 96).14 — Ibid. (paragraph 97).15 — Ibid. (paragraph 98).
12 – Prav tam (točki 78 in 82).13 – Prav tam (točka 96).14 – Prav tam (točka 97).15 – Prav tam (točka 98).
COMMISSION v GIRARDOT other post for which she might reasonably have applied subsequently’ 18and adjusted found to exist, the Court of First Instance points out that Ms Girardot adduced no evidence attesting to the existence of such damage.
KOMISIJA PROTI GIRARDOT na katero bi se kasneje ustrezno prijavila, sprejeta“, 18ter pomnožilo ex æquo et bono nepremoženjske �kode, povezane s poslab�anjem du�evnega zdravja in z depresivnim stanjem M.-C. Girardot kot tudi zatrjevane telesne �kode zaradi ugotovljene nezakonitosti, je Sodi�če prve stopnje ugotovilo, da M.-C. Girardot ni predstavila nobenega dokaza o obstoju takih vrst �kod.
22 ex aequo et bono the difference in earnings of EUR 185 570 by a multiplying factor of 0.5 intended to reflect the existence of a genuine chance (50%) of taking up one of those posts.
22 razliko v plačilu 185.570 EUR s faktorjem 0,5, ki naj bi izražal obstoj resne možnosti (50-odstotne) za zasedbo enega od teh delovnih mest.
The amount of fair financial compensation was accordingly set at EUR 92 785. 19
Znesek primerne denarne od�kodnine je bil torej določen na 92.785 EUR. 19
In its appeal, the Commission claims that the Court should:
S pritožbo Komisija Sodi�ču predlaga, naj:
— set aside the judgment under appeal;
– razveljavi izpodbijano sodbo;
With regard to the compensation for supplementary material damage, nonmaterial damage and physical injury claimed by Ms Girardot, the Court of First Instance considered, in paragraph 123 of the judgment under appeal, that the purpose of the fair financial compensation was to give effect to the interim judgment and to provide adequate protection for Ms Girardot’s rights by compensating ex aequo et bono for the impossibility of restoration of the situation existing prior to the unlawful act committed by the Commission.
Glede dodatne premoženjske, nepremoženjske in telesne �kode, ki jo je uveljavljala M.-C. Girardot, je Sodi�če prve stopnje v točki 123 izpodbijane sodbe ocenilo, da je bil predmet primerne denarne od�kodnine nadomestiti izvr�itev vmesne sodbe in ustrezno za�čititi pravice M.-C. Girardot, tako da se ex æquo et bono ustvari izravnava za položaj, kot se po nezakonitem ravnanju Komisije ni mogel več vzpostaviti.
The Court of First Instance therefore took the view that, in the absence of a prior claim for damages, the purpose of the compensation could not have been to make good any other damage which that unlawful act might have caused the person concerned and that, accordingly, the arguments concerning other damage alleged by Ms Girardot were irrelevant.
Sodi�če prve stopnje je torej ocenilo, da brez predhodnega od�kodninskega zahtevka namen od�kodnine ni mogel biti poprava vseh ostalih vrst �kode, ki ji jih je nezakonitost lahko povzročila, in da tako trditve v zvezi z drugimi vrstami �kod, ki jih zatrjuje M.-C. Girardot, niso upo�tevne.
20 The Court of First Instance ruled that, in any event, none of the other alleged damage could be taken into consideration for the purpose of setting the amount of fair financial compensation.
20 Sodi�če prve stopnje je presodilo, da v nobenem primeru druge zatrjevane vrste �kod niso mogle biti upo�tevane pri določanju zneska primerne denarne od�kodnine.
— order that the parties should bear their own costs.
– strankama naloži plačilo svojih stro�kov.
18 — Judgment under appeal (paragraph 118).19 — Ibid. (paragraphs 119 and 121).20 — Ibid. (paragraph 124 and first sentence of paragraph 125).21 — Ibid. (second sentence of paragraph 125).
18 – Izpodbijana sodba (točka 118).19 – Prav tam (točki 119 in 121).20 – Prav tam (točki 124 in 125, prvi stavek).21 – Prav tam (točka 125, drugi stavek).
— declare the appeal brought by the Commission inadmissible and, in any event, unfounded; loss of an opportunity to be recruited by the Commission where the latter has adopted an unlawful decision, thus depriving the person concerned of having her application accepted.
– presodi način izračuna izgube možnosti zaposlitve pri Komisiji, če je ta sprejela nezakonito odločitev in tako kandidatu onemogočila potrditev njegove prijave.
It added, both in its pleadings and at the hearing, that the aim of its appeal is that the Court should identify a consistent legal argument and method for the purpose of calculating the loss of an opportunity to obtain a post.
Pri tem je dodala, tako v svojih vlogah kot tudi med obravnavo, da je zastavljeni cilj njene pritožbe, da Sodi�če oblikuje pravno utemeljitev in enotno metodo za izračun izgube možnosti zaposlitve.
— declare her cross-appeal admissible and uphold the submitted claims for annulment and damages;
– naj njeno nasprotno pritožbo razglasi za dopustno ter ugodi predlogu za razveljavitev in od�kodninskemu zahtevku;
— order the Commission to pay the costs.
Komisiji naloži plačilo stro�kov.