This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62006TJ0247
Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Appeal Chamber) of 5 July 2007. # Carlos Sanchez Ferriz v Commission of the European Communities. # Appeal - Public service - Officials. # Case T-247/06 P.
Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Appeal Chamber) of 5 July 2007.
Carlos Sanchez Ferriz v Commission of the European Communities.
Appeal - Public service - Officials.
Case T-247/06 P.
Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Appeal Chamber) of 5 July 2007.
Carlos Sanchez Ferriz v Commission of the European Communities.
Appeal - Public service - Officials.
Case T-247/06 P.
European Court Reports – Staff Cases 2007 I-B-1-00005; II-B-1-00023
ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:2007:199
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE (Appeal Chamber)
5 July 2007
Case T-247/06 P
Carlos Sanchez Ferriz
v
Commission of the European Communities
(Appeals – Civil Service – Officials – Career development report – 2003 appraisal – Appeal unfounded)
Appeal: against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (Second Chamber) of 28 June 2006 in Case F-19/05 Sanchez Ferriz v Commission [2006] ECR-SC I-A-1-41 and II-A-1-135, seeking to have that judgment set aside.
Held: Appeal dismissed. Mr Carlos Sanchez Ferriz is ordered to pay the costs of these proceedings.
Summary
Officials – Reports procedure – Career development report
(Staff Regulations, Art. 43)
There is a breach of the principle of equal treatment where two classes of persons whose factual and legal situations are not essentially different are treated differently or where different situations are treated in an identical manner.
The fact that, because of the rule establishing a weighting of points awarded under the various headings of the career development report, two officials with exactly the same number of points under one heading of that report receive different total numbers of points when the points awarded under other headings are added, is not to be treated as an infringement of the principle of equal treatment, since that difference reflects the fact that those officials are not in the same situation in relation to those other headings. The same finding is true in a case where two officials who have obtained different numbers of points under one of those headings receive an identical total number of points when the points awarded under the other headings are added.
(see paras 36-37)
See: T‑18/89 and T‑24/89 Tagaras v Court of Justice [1991] ECR II‑53, para. 68; T‑219/02 and T‑337/02 Lutz Herrera v Commission [2004] ECR-SC I‑A‑319 and II‑1407, para. 93; T‑43/04 Fardoom and Reinard v Commission [2005] ECR-SC I‑A‑329 and II‑1465, para. 42; T‑47/04 Milbert and Others v Commission [2006] ECR-SC I-A-2-281 and II-A-2-1455 para. 53