EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 217/51

(Case T-183/21)

(2021/C 217/67)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: QP and 15 other applicants (represented by: N. de Montigny, lawyer)

Defendants: Council of the European Union, European Commission, European External Action Service (EEAS), and Eulex Kosovo

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:

principally:

—with regard to the employment relationship:

—in respect of all of the applicants:

—reclassify the contractual relationship of the applicants as a permanent contract of employment;

—order the defendants to compensate the applicants for the lack of affiliation to a national social security scheme, to be determined on the basis of the applicable legislation;

—order them to pay interest on those sums;

—set a time limit for the parties to assess that compensation to be established on the basis of the relevant applicable legislation, in accordance with the principles laid down by the General Court in the decision to be issued;

—in respect of the applicants, whose contractual relationship was terminated by a unilateral decision of the defendants:

—order the defendants to pay compensation in lieu of notice:

—to the applicant QP: EUR 42 092,50.

—to the applicant QT: EUR 69 880,54.

—to the applicant QU: EUR 53 749,17.

—to the applicant QV: EUR 57 159,69.

—to the applicant QY: EUR 63 298,15.

—to the applicant RB: EUR 55 303,02.

—to the applicant RD: EUR 55 373,64.

—to the applicant RF: EUR 40 201,21.

—order the defendants to pay each of the applicants compensation for unlawful dismissal assessed ex aequo et bono at EUR 12 500 per year of seniority;

—order them to pay to each of the applicants QP, QR, QS, QT, QU, QV, QW, QY, QZ, RA, RB, RC, RD and RE the difference in unpaid remuneration from the date of the salary reclassification, namely 1 September 2012;

—order them to pay interest on those sums;

—hear the defendants ordered to pay the costs.

—with regard to other rights:

—declare that the applicants should have been recruited as temporary agents by one of the first three defendants and declare that the first three defendants treated the applicants unlawfully and in a discriminatory manner, without objective justification, as regards their remuneration, pension rights and related benefits, and the guarantee of future employment;

—order the first three defendants to compensate each of the applicants for the damage suffered as a result of the non-application of the remuneration, pension rights, allowances and benefits arising from the application of the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Union, caused by the unlawful unequal treatment;

—order them to pay interest on those sums;

—set a time limit for the parties to assess that compensation, taking account of the grade and step in which the applicants should have been recruited respectively, the average increase in their remuneration, the development of their respective careers, the allowances which they should then have received under those temporary agent contracts, and compare the results obtained with the remuneration actually received by the applicants;

alternatively:

—order the first three defendants to compensate the applicants in respect of their non-contractual liability resulting from the failure to respect their fundamental rights, assessed ex aequo et bono at EUR 20 000 per year of seniority;

—order them to pay interest on those sums;

—hear the defendants ordered to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of their action, the applicants rely on seven pleas in law.

First plea, alleging the abuse of rights in the successive use of fixed-term contracts and infringement of the principle of proportionality. The applicants rely on the application of the substantive law applicable to their contracts and request reclassification of their contracts of employment with the institutions as permanent contracts of employment and retroactive payment of their social security rights and, in the case of some of them, payment of compensation in lieu of notice

Second plea, alleging infringement of the principle of equal treatment and of non-discrimination. The applicants take the view that the legal framework which the defendants established for the conclusion of international individual contracts of employment is (i) discriminatory in relation to the conditions of employment of other EU staff, (ii) unclear and (iii) lastly, in breach of the rules of European public policy, including the values and principles enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

Third plea, alleging infringement of the right to be heard.

Fourth plea, alleging lack of legal certainty and infringement of the right to sound administration.

Fifth plea, alleging infringement of the principle of consultation of staff representatives.

Sixth plea, alleging infringement of the European Code of Good Administrative Behaviour.

Seventh plea, alleging infringement of the right to free movement of workers.