EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 46/59

(Case T-809/14)

(2015/C 046/77)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Italian Republic (represented by: P. Gentili, avvocato dello Stato, and G. Palmieri, acting as Agent)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—annul Note HR.A 2 of 2 October 2014 sent by the European Commission’s Director-General for Human Resources to the Director-General for the European Union of the Italian Republic’s Ministry for Foreign Affairs;

—order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The present action is brought against the note mentioned above, which follows the vacancy notice for the post of Director of the Translation Centre for the Bodies of the European Union (Luxembourg) (COM/2014/10356) — previously contested in Case T-636/14 — and which takes a position on the supposed difference between the notice in question and the form on the Commission’s website through which applications may be submitted, which limits the languages in which such submissions may be made to English, French and German.

In support of the action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law.

1.First plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 18 TFEU and the fourth paragraph of Article 24 TFEU, Article 22 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Articles 1 and 2 of Council Regulation No 1 of 15 April 1958 determining the languages to be used by the European Economic Community, and Article 1d(1) and (6) of the Staff Regulations, in so far as the notice, by its reference to the Commission’s website, which set out the binding provision mentioned above, made it compulsory for applicants to submit their CV and supporting letter in English, French or German, rather than allowing them to submit those documents in any one of the languages of the European Union. According to the applicant, in order to compensate for those defects, the Commission should have edited the website and extended the deadline for submitting applications.

2.Second plea in law, alleging a failure to observe the principles of legitimate expectations and sincere cooperation (Article 4(3) TEU), in so far as the Commission had formally assured the Italian Government several times during the process for adopting the notice that the language discrimination mentioned above would be removed, but instead acted in the opposite manner when drafting that notice and preparing the rules for the functioning of the website to which the notice refers those wishing to submit applications.

3.Third plea in law, alleging a failure to state reasons, in so far as the decision should have been adopted by the Commission through the President or the competent Commissioner, and not by the Director-General for Human Resources.