Notice for the OJ
Action brought on 23 July 2002 by Miguel Forcat Icardo against the Commission of the European Communities
(Case T-224/02)
Language of the case: French
An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 23 July 2002 by Miguel Forcat Icardo, represented by M. Lucas, lawyer.
The applicant claims that the Court should:
(annul the decision of 8 December 1998 of the Director-General of DG DEV;
(in so far as necessary, annul the instructions attached to the note of 29 July 1999 from the Head of the "Human Resources" unit of DG DEV;
(annul the decision of 21 October 1999 of the Director-General of DG DEV;
(annul the decision of 22 December 1999 of the Director-General of DG DEV;
(annul the decision of 19 February 2001 of the Director-General of DG DEV;
(annul the decision of 14 November 2001 of the Director of Directorate D of DG DEV, approved by its Director-General;
(annul his staff report for 1999-2001, drawn up on 18 March 2002 by the Director of Directorate D of DG DEV;
(annul the decision by the External Service Steering Committee to reject his application for a post as Head of Delegation under the 2002 rotation exercise, as well as the confirmation of that decision;
(annul the implied decision of 16 September 2001 to reject his request of 16 May 2001;
(should they constitute a response to the request of 16 May 2001, annul the decisions of 31 October and 14 December 2001 by the Chef de Cabinet of the Vice-President of the Commission and of the Director-General of DG DEV;
(establish the unlawfulness of the failure to reassign the applicant as Head of the "Indian Ocean" unit of DG DEV by his Director-General in March 2000;
(establish the unlawfulness of the failure to second the applicant, in the interest of the service, to the Spanish civil service in Madrid or to the FAO in Rome;
(order the Commission to pay him, as compensation for non-material damage, the sum of EUR 10 000 assessed ex aequo et bono;
(order the Commission to pay him, as compensation for the damage to his career, a sum corresponding to the difference between the retirement pension and other benefits to which he is entitled under the second indent of Article 52 of the Staff Regulations on the date on which he requests early retirement and the remuneration, retirement pension and other benefits to which he would be entitled if he could have retired from his post at the age of 65;
(order the Commission to pay him 8% annual interest on those amounts, dating from 23 July 2002 until payment in full;
(order the Commission to pay the costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments:
The applicant, a former Head of Unit, in Grade A3, requests annulment of the Commission's decision to reassign him as a counsellor and to entrust him with certain duties in that capacity. He also asks the Court to find that the Commission is acting unlawfully by failing to reassign him in a middle management post or to second him outside the institution in the interest of the service. In addition, he is requesting the annulment of his periodic report for 1999-2001 and compensatation for the material and non-material damage he has suffered.
In support of the forms of order sought, the applicant claims that the Commission infringed Articles 5(4) and 7 of the Staff Regulations, as well as Annex IV to the General Implementing Provisions, of 10 March 1997, of Article 5(4) of the Staff Regulations, in that he was not assigned the functions or was assigned functions which did not correspond to his post and grade. Moreover, he claims that the Commission infringed the principles of legal certainty and protection of legitimate expectations in that not reassigning him in certain middle management posts and not seconding him outside the institution in the interest of the service went against promises, decisions and commitments made by the administration.
____________