Appeal brought on 24 November 2011 by A against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 14 September 2011 in Case F-12/09, A v Commission

(Case T-595/11 P)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: A (Port-Vendres, France) (represented by B. Cambier, A. Paternostre and L. Levi, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought by the appellant

Annul the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union of 14 September 2011 in Case F-12/09 ;

Consequently, uphold the claims of the appellant at first instance and, accordingly,

annul the decisions by which the European Commission refuses to pay the appellant the compensation due under Article 73 of the Staff Regulations and order the European Commission to pay that compensation to the appellant immediately, together with additional compensation under common law representing the difference between the amount of the actual loss suffered and the part of that loss for which compensation is paid under Article 73 of the Staff Regulations,

order the Commission to pay the appellant late-payment interest calculated from the month of December 2004, the date at which the work-related origin of the sickness, the amount of the loss sufferance and the stabilisation of his state of health ought to have been acknowledged,

order the European Commission to pay the appellant any sum which appears to the General Court to be adequate to compensate the appellant for the non-pecuniary harm suffered by him as a result of the numerous errors and irregularities committed by the services of the European Commission in the investigation of the medical procedures concerning him,

order the defendant to pay the costs at both instances.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the appeal, the appellant relies on three pleas in law.

1.    First plea in law, alleging infringement of the right to action within a reasonable time, of the principle of the duty of care, of the principle of legitimate expectations and distortion of the file.

2.    Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the right to full compensation for the loss suffered.

3.    Third plea in law, alleging, firstly, infringement of Articles 73 and 90 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union and of the principles of sound administration, procedural economy, non-retroactivity, hierarchy of norms and the concept of consolidation and, secondly, distortion of the facts and of the appellant's arguments.

____________