Case T-60/01: Action brought on 13 March 2001 by Marie-Josée Bollendorff against the European Parliament
Date: 2001-06-16
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Parliament, European official, action for annulment (EU), incapacity for work, paid leave, sick leave

C 173/34

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

16.6.2001

Action brought on 13 March 2001 by Marie-Josée Bollen-
dorff against the European Parliament

Action brought on 19 March 2001 by Afrikanische Frucht-
Compagnie GmbH against the Council of the European
Union and the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-60/01)

(2001/C 173/61)

(Case T-64/01)

(2001/C 173/62)

(Language of the case: French)

(Language of the case: German)

An action against the European Parliament was brought before
the Court of First Instance of the European Communities
on 13 March 2000 by Marie-Josée Bollendorff, residing at
Bertrange (Luxembourg), represented by Laurent Mosar, avo-
cat, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the decision by which the appointing authority
took the view that the applicant’s absence from 21 March
2000 to 30 April 2000 was irregular and deducted 194
working hours from her annual leave entitlement;

— order the European Parliament to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

An action against the Council of the European Union and the
Commission of
the European Communities was brought
before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities
on 19 March 2001 by Afrikanische Frucht-Compagnie GmbH,
established in Hamburg (Germany), represented by Gerrit
Schohe, Rechtsanwalt, with an address for service in Luxem-
bourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— order

to the

to pay

the defendants

applicant
EUR 1 358 228 together with interest thereon at the rate
of 3,75 % from the date of pronouncement of judgment
and reasonable compensation for the inflation which has
occurred since 1 January 1999, at the further rate of at
least 1,1 % per annum on EUR 1 358 228 ;

— declare that the defendants are obliged to compensate the
applicant for all further loss and damage suffered or to be
suffered by
(EC)
Nos 1637/98 and 2362/98 and, in particular, the rules
contained therein;

result of Regulations

as

it

a

The applicant’s incapacity for work, certified by two doctors,
was contested by the institution’s medical officer. Those two
doctors then confirmed their certificates, and the applicant
was absent during the period covered by the certificates. Later
on, the applicant discovered that the time for which she had
been absent during the period in question had been deducted
from her annual leave entitlement.

— reserve its decision as to costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of her claim, the applicant maintains that the
deduction decision was adopted in breach of Articles 59 and
60 [of the Staff Regulations] and that it therefore has no legal
basis whatever.

According to the applicant, no decision concerning a
deduction from her annual leave entitlement was notified to
her by the head of the Personnel Division, and the appointing
authority at no time communicated to the applicant any
decision which would have enabled her to comment on the
fact that the certificates were contested. Consequently, the
European Parliament has infringed Article 25 of the Staff
Regulations.

The applicant has for many years sold bananas from third
countries to customers in Austria, Finland and Sweden.

The action concerns the calculation of the applicant’s reference
quantities for 1999. According to the applicant, that calcu-
lation is characterised by three special features which derogate
from the rules governing the organisation of the market
applying in respect of the years prior to 1999, and as a result
of which the market operators existing in the Community up
until 31 December 1994 have been placed at a disadvantage,
whilst advantageous treatment has been afforded to operators
in the new Member States. First, the rule governing the
determination of the reference period has been changed.
Next,
in calculating the reference quantities for 1999, the
Community proceeded on the basis of excessively high quanti-
ties in so far as concerns market operators in Austria, Finland
and Sweden. Lastly, although the reference quantities for 1999
should have been calculated in accordance with Articles 3 and
5 of Regulation No 1442/93 (1), they were in fact calculated in
accordance with the criterion of the so-called ‘actual importer’.