Case T-7/01: Action brought on 12 January 2001 by Norman Pyres against the Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2001-03-24
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment (EU), equal treatment, servant (EU), temporary employment, work contract

24.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 95/17

— Error of fact and absolute lack of statement of reasons.
First, the need to involve consumer organisations was not
provided for in the invitation to tender and, secondly,
evidence of the requisite experience had been submitted.

— condemn the Commission to pay damages provisionally

evaluated at 1 Euro for the prejudice suffered;

— condemn the Commission to pay the costs.

— Internal

inconsistency of the decision and misuse of
powers. In a communication dated 14 September 2000,
sent by the Commission to the participants in the
tendering procedure, it was stated that not only had the
applicant consortium’s offer been selected, that is to say
its tender been accepted, it had also been awarded the
contract in which it was interested.

— Breach of the terms of the tender and invalidity on
grounds of incompetence. The applicants state in this
respect that the Director General who signed the contest-
ed decision was not, under the terms of the tender, the
person competent to carry out all the communications
relating to the tendering procedure and to adopt the
relevant measures, and that the contested letter confuses
selection criteria, for the purposes of participating in the
tendering procedure, and grounds for exclusion from the
tendering procedure itself.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant entered into a three-year contract of employ-
ment with the Authority Empowered to Conclude Contracts
of Employment (AECCE), which contract was renewable for a
further year.

Despite allegedly favourable opinions expressed in the appli-
cant’s last performance report, the AECCE decided only to
extend the applicant’s contract for six months.

The applicant seeks the annulment of this decision and submits
that the AECCE’s decision violated the obligation to state
reasons contained in Article 25 of the Staff Regulations. As all
three-year contracts of temporary staff were allegedly extended,
except for the one of the applicant, a limit of six months
for the extension of the applicant’s contract constitutes an
infringement of the principle of non-discrimination and goes
clearly against the interest of the service.

Furthermore, the applicant alleges that the decision infringes
Article 26 of the Staff Regulation and violates his rights to
defence, and that it constitutes a misuse of powers.

Action brought on 12 January 2001 by Norman Pyres
against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-7/01)

(2001/C 95/33)

(Language of the case: English)

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 12 January 2001 by Norman Pyres
(Swan Residence, rue Ph. Baucq, 100, Belgium), represented by
Georges Vandersanden and Laure Levi, of De Backer, Brussels.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Action brought on 19 January 2001 by Michael Becker
against the European Court of Auditors

(Case T-9/01)

(2001/C 95/34)

(Language of the case: German)

An action against the European Court of Auditors was brought
before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities
on 19 January 2001 by Michael Becker, of Luxembourg,
represented by Roy Nathan, lawyer.

— annul the decision of the Commission of 22 January
2000 extending the Appellant’s contract of employment
only until 30 July 2000, so for a further period limited to
six months, and, if necessary, annul the decision of the
Commission of 6 October 2000 rejecting the Appellant’s
complaint;

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— order the defendant to withdraw its decision of 13 No-

vember 2000;

— order the defendant to pay all the costs.