Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document C2007/056/76

    Case F-125/05: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 1 February 2007 — Tsarnavas v Commission (Officials — Promotion — Consideration of comparative merits of officials in different services — Application for damages — Admissibility — Reasonable period — Lawyers' fees — Pre-litigation procedure — Non-material harm)

    IO C 56, 10.3.2007, p. 41–41 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    10.3.2007   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 56/41


    Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 1 February 2007 — Tsarnavas v Commission

    (Case F-125/05) (1)

    (Officials - Promotion - Consideration of comparative merits of officials in different services - Application for damages - Admissibility - Reasonable period - Lawyers' fees - Pre-litigation procedure - Non-material harm)

    (2007/C 56/76)

    Language of the case: French

    Parties

    Applicant: Vassilios Tsarnavas (Athens, Greece) (represented by: N. Lhoëst, lawyer)

    Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: C. Berardis-Kayser and D. Martin, Agents)

    Re:

    The applicant is seeking, first, annulment of the Commission decisions of 1 April 2005 and 7 October 2005, dismissing its applications for damages in respect of the material and non-material harm suffered under the 1998 and 1999 promotion procedures and, secondly, an order that the defendant is to pay damages valued on an equitable basis at EUR 72 000 in respect of the material and non-material harm suffered.

    Operative part of the judgment

    The Tribunal:

    1.

    orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay Mr Tsarnavas EUR 3 000 by way of compensation for the non-material harm;

    2.

    dismisses the remainder of the action;

    3.

    orders the Commission of the European Communities to bear its own costs and to pay one third of the costs incurred by Mr Tsarnavas;

    4.

    orders Mr Tsarnavas to bear two thirds of his own costs.


    (1)  OJ C 60, 11.3.2006, p. 54.


    Top