Case T-271/01: Action brought on 23 October 2001 by José Manuel López Cejudo against Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2002-01-05
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, European official, action for annulment (EU), dependant, family benefit, maintenance obligation

C 3/44

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

5.1.2002

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant contests Commission Decision C(2001) 1764
final of 11 July 2001 declaring incompatible with the common
market the tax reductions arising from the tenth addendum to
Norma Foral (Regional Law) No 7/1997 of 22 December
1997, which provides for a tax credit of 45 % of the investment
in new fixed material assets in excess of PTA 2 500 million
(EUR 15 025 303) made by undertakings in the Territorio
Histo´ rico de Guipu´ zcoa.

— order the defendant to pay damages in the form of default
interest on the percentage of tax abatement and the
percentage of the expatriation allowance, at the rate of
6,75 % per annum from November 2000 until such time
as the amounts due are fully paid;

— order the defendant to pay all the costs.

The pleas in law and main arguments put forward by the
applicant are identical with those put
forward in Case
T-225/01.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Action brought on 23 October 2001 by José Manuel
Lo´ pez Cejudo against Commission of the European Com-
munities

(Case T-271/01)

(2002/C 3/76)

(Language of the case: French)

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 23 October 2001 by José Manuel
Lo´ pez Cejudo, residing in Brussels, represented by Georges
Vandersanden and Laure Levi, lawyers.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the decision contained in the applicant’s salary
statement for October 2000, refusing him entitlement to
dependent child and education allowances in respect of
his four children and, consequently, to take into account
such family allowances for purposes of tax abatement
and expatriation allowance since July 1999, including in
respect of the period October 2000 to September 2001,
and, in so far as necessary, annul the decision of 16 July
2001 taken as a result of the complaint;

— order the defendant to pay damages in the form of default
interest on the amounts improperly withheld by the
defendant pursuant to the salary statement for October
2000, at the rate of 6,75 % per annum from November
2000 until such time as full payment is effected;

Until the adoption of the contested decision, the applicant was
in receipt of dependent child and education allowances in
respect of his four children. Those allowances were paid in his
name and on his behalf to his wife, an official of the European
Parliament whom he is in the process of divorcing. Custody of
the children has been awarded to his wife, who receives
alimony payments from him.

In October 2000, the applicant learned from his monthly
salary statement that the Commission refused to grant him
dependent child and education allowances in respect of his
four children and, consequently, to take into account such
family allowances for purposes of tax abatement and expatri-
ation allowance as from July 1999.

As a result of the complaint lodged in July 2001 by the
applicant against that decision, the Commission acknowledged
that he shared in the actual maintenance of the children and,
accordingly, decided to grant him, as from August 2001,
dependent child and education allowances, with full effects
with regard to tax abatement and expatriation allowances, to
in accordance with an allocation
be shared with his wife,
formula which the defendant has to agree with the European
Parliament. Accordingly, entitlement to the allowances in issue
was not granted to the applicant for the period from October
2000 to July 2001.

The applicant takes the view that the contested decision:

— infringes the principle of

legality,

inasmuch as the
Commission itself acknowledged that the arguments put
forward by the applicant challenging his salary statement
for October 2000 were well founded, but only made a
decision regarding the future;

— infringes the principle that reasons for decisions must be
stated, inasmuch as the Commission does not explain the
reason why it limited the effects of its positive decision;

5.1.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 3/45

— infringes Articles 2, 3 and 4 of Annex VII to the Staff
Regulations, Opinion No 178/87 of the board of the
heads of administration of 3 December 1987 and
Articles 3(4) and 4 of Regulation (EEC, Euratom, ECSC)
No 260/68 of the Council of 29 February 1968 laying
down the conditions and procedure for applying the
tax for the benefit of the European Communities, as
inasmuch as the
interpreted by the Court of Justice,
applicant actually maintains his children and is entitled
to have benefits, which are paid to his wife in the name
and on behalf of both parents, taken into account when
calculating tax and calculating the expatriation allowance.

Action brought on 15 October 2001 by Philip Morris
International Inc. against the Commission of the European
Communities

(Case T-272/01)

(2002/C 3/77)

Action brought on 22 October 2001 by Innova Privat-
Akademie GmbH against the Commission of the European
Communities

(Case T-273/01)

(2002/C 3/78)

(Language of the case: German)

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 22 October 2001 by Innova Privat-
Akademie GmbH, Berlin, represented by Thomas Kreutzfield,
lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— order

the

to the

to pay

defendant

applicant
Euro 104 790 together with interest of 5 % above
the basic rate under paragraph 1 of the Diskontsatz-
U¨ berleitungs-Gesetz of 9.6.1998 of the Federal Republic
of Germany from the date on which the proceedings
became pending;

(Language of the case: English)

— order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 15 October 2001 by Philip Morris
International Inc., represented by Mr Jacques Derenne and
Mr Eric Morgan de Rivery of Liederkerke Siméon Wessing
Houthoff, Brussels (Belgium).

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the Contested Act resulting in the filing of the
Complaint on 6 August 2001 before the New York
District Court
as publicly
the
announced by the Commission in Press Release
IP/01/1193 of 6 August 2001;

applicant,

against

— order the Commission to pay the applicant’s costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant in the present case is the same undertaking as in
case T-377/00 (1). The facts, grounds and main arguments are
similar to those arising in this case.

(1) Philip Morris International/Commission (OJ C 79 of 10.3.2001,

p. 23).

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant applied via a German bank for promotional
funds from the European Commission in order to finance a
project within the framework of the EU ECIP promotional
programme. The subject matter of the applicant’s project was
a feasibility study on a joint venture in the area of professional
training in India.

been approved with a

In March 1999 the bank informed the applicant that the
subsidy of
application had
Euro 115 328. The Commission had given that information
to the bank infomally by telephone. However, the applicant
subsequently received no further information from the Com-
mission.

In 2000 the ECIP project was halted on account of the
irregularities within the Commission which had come to
light in 1999. Despite the above-mentioned agreement, the
applicant received no funds from the ECIP project.

The applicant, which, in reliance on the promotion of the
project, had concluded a contract with a consultancy firm with
respect to the feasibility study, claims damages for the loss
which it has allegedly incurred and claims that the failure to
pay the promotional funds is unlawful and caused the loss
suffered by it.