Action brought on 7 January 2013 – ZZ v Commission

(Case F-2/13)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: G. Cipressa, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Application for annulment of the implied decision rejecting the applicant’s request to apply to the salary received by him from May 2001 until the end of his mission in Angola the correction coefficient referred to in Articles 12 and 13 of Annex X to the Staff Regulations.

Form of order sought

Annul the decision, whatever the form in which it was adopted, by which the Commission rejected the request of 24 October 2011;

in so far as necessary, annul the measure, whatever the form in which it was adopted, by which the Commission rejected the complaint of 21 May 2012 sent by the applicant to the appointing authority against the decision rejecting the request of 24 October 2011 and seeking the annulment of that decision and the granting of the request of 24 October 2011;

in so far as necessary, annul the note of 14 August 2012;

order the Commission to pay to the applicant, for each month from March 2001 until the last month of his mission, if only de jure, carrying out duties in the EC Delegation in Angola, the sum arising from the difference (‘the difference in remuneration’) between what the applicant should have received if the correction coefficient for Angola, as referred to in Article 64 of the Staff Regulations and Articles 12 and 13 in Annex X to the regulations, had been applied de jure to his monthly salary, and what the applicant actually received by way of remuneration pursuant to Article 62 of the regulations;

order the Commission to pay to the applicant, in respect of every difference in remuneration, interest by way of compensation for the delay on its part in paying the sums in question, at the rate of 10 per annum, with annual capitalisation, with effect from the date on which each monthly instalment of his remuneration was paid, or should have been paid to the applicant, until actual payment of the differences in remuneration;

order the Commission to pay to the applicant, in respect of each difference in remuneration, compensation for the erosion of purchasing power, by reference to the annual variations in the cost of living index for Brussels, referred to in Article 1 of Annex XI to the Staff Regulation as the ‘Brussels International Index’, or any other such index which the Court may deem it fair and equitable to apply in the present case, with annual capitalisation, with effect from the date on which each monthly instalment of the applicant’s remuneration was paid or should have been paid until actual payment of the compensation in question;

order the Commission to pay the cost.