Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 14 April 2011 - Clarke and Others v OHIM

(Case F-82/08) 1

(Staff case - Temporary staff - Article 8 CEOS - Clause terminating a contract if the agent is not included on the reserve list of a competition - OHIM/AD/02/07 and OHIM/AST/02/07 open competitions - Act adversely affecting an official - Principle of performance of contracts in good faith - Duty of care - Principle of sound administration - Language requirements - EPSO not competent - Directive 1999/70/EC - Fixed-term work)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicants: Nicola Clarke and Others (Alicante, Spain) (represented by: H. Tettenborn, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: I. de Medrano Caballero, agent, and D. Waelbroeck, lawyer)

Re:

Application for, first, a declaration of the invalidity of the clauses in the applicants' contracts which make provision for automatic termination of their contracts in the event that they are not included on the reserve list drawn up following the first open competition for their function group and, second, for a declaration that the open competitions OHIM/AD/02/07 and OHIM/AST/02/07 have no effect on the contracts of the applicants or for the annulment of those competitions. Further, application for damages for non-material damage caused to the applicants.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

annuls the decision of the Director of the Human Resources Department of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 19 December 2007, and the OHIM decision of 7 March 2008, in so far as the latter decision rejected the respective applications by Mmes Clarke, Papathanasiou and Periañez-González that the termination clause in their temporary staff contracts not be applied in relation to the OHIM/AD/02/07 and OHIM/AST/02/07 competitions;

orders OHIM to pay to each of the applicants the sum of EUR 2 000 in damages;

dismisses the action as to the remainder;

orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay those of the applicants.

____________

1 - OJ C 19, 24.1.2009, p.38.