Case T-332/01: Action brought on 27 December 2001 by José María Pujals Gomis against Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2002-02-16
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment (EU), assistant, competition (EU), customs profession, professional experience

C 44/28

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

16.2.2002

The applicants submit further that the Council and Com-
mission have not examined the reasons why the Taliban
Sanctions Committee included the applicants in its list. Nor
were the applicants given any opportunity to apprise them-
selves of and refute the allegations on which the decision to
include them in Annex I was based. The applicants have
thus had onerous sanctions imposed on them without any
legal
opportunity to defend themselves. The fundamental
principle of the right to a fair and equitable hearing has thus
been disregarded.

Moreover, Regulation (EC) No 2199/2001 is marred by
significant flaws, which points clearly to the need to consider
each individual case separately. At the same time, there are
good reasons to doubt whether it is appropriate to impose
sanctions on the applicants.

(1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 2199/2001 of 12 November
2001 amending, for the fourth time, Council Regulation (EC)
No 467/2001 prohibiting the export of certain goods and services
to Afghanistan, strengthening the flight ban and extending the
freeze of funds and other financial resources in respect of the
Taliban
(EC)
and
of Afghanistan
No 337/2000 (OJ 2001 L 295, p. 16).

repealing Regulation

(2) Council Regulation (EC) No 467/2001 of 6 March 2001 pro-
hibiting the export of certain goods and services to Afghanistan,
strengthening the flight ban and extending the freeze of funds and
other financial resources in respect of the Taliban of Afghanistan,
and repealing Regulation (EC) No 337/2000 (OJ 2001 L 67, p. 1).

— annul the measure of 22 May 2001 adversely affecting the
applicant and the implied rejection of her administrative
complaint;

— require the defendant to pay to the applicant 85 % of the

cost of surgery on her of BEF 200 234;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

1.

The applicant challenges the adverse decision of the
Claims Office of the Joint Sickness Insurance Scheme of
22 May 2001 relating to meeting the costs of operating
on the applicant.

2.

(a)

Infringement of Articles 24 and 72 of the Staff
Regulations, and of the Rules on sickness insurance
for officials of the European Communities (in par-
ticular of Article 1 and Annexes I and II).

(b)

Infringment of the principles of good adminstration
and of transparency.

(c) Manifest error as to the facts and clear error of

assessment.

(d)

Inadequate statement of grounds.

Action brought on 17 December 2001 by R against the
Commission of the European Communities

Action brought on 27 December 2001 by José Marı´a Pujals
Gomis against Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-313/01)

(2002/C 44/48)

(Language of the case: Greek)

(Case T-332/01)

(2002/C 44/49)

(Language of the case: Spanish)

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 17 December 2001 by R, a
Commission official, represented by K. Tagaras, Lawyer, with
an address for service in Athens.

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 27 December 2001 by José
Marı´a Pujals Gomis, residing in Cerdanyola del Vallés (Spain),
represented by Javier Pujals Gomis, lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— grant the application in its entirety and in respect of all

— Annul the decision of the selection board for Competition

its claims;

COM/B/1/0 of 28 September 2001;

16.2.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 44/29

— In the alternative, annul the present procedure and order

Removal from the Register of Case T-102/99 (1)

a fresh procedure;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant contests the decision of the selection board for
General Competition COM/B/1/0, organised by the Com-
mission with a view to constituting a reserve list of assistants
at Grade B 5/B 4 in the field of customs (1), not to mark the
tests sat by the applicant on 6 July 2001 on the ground that
he did not have sufficient professional experience as required
by Point III.B.2 of the competition notice.

The applicant claims that he has the professional experience
required by the competition notice, as attested when he
submitted his application, and that the contested decision does
not comply with the requirement to give reasons and is
contrary to the principle of equality of treatment. The applicant
further argues that inviting the candidates to tests and to then
check whether the conditions laid down for the competition
have been met amounts to an inadequate procedure which
runs counter to the principles of sound administration and of
legal certainty and deprives those candidates who have been
excluded of their rights of defence.

(1) OJ C 24A, p. 22.

(2002/C 44/50)

(Language of the case: French)

By order of 9 November 2001, the President of the Fourth
Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities has ordered the removal from the Register of
Case T-102/99: L v Commission of the European Communi-
ties.

(1) OJ C 188, 3.7.99.

Removal from the Register of Case T-68/01 (1)

(2002/C 44/51)

(Language of the case: German)

By order of 5 November 2001, the President of the Second
Chamber, Extended Composition, of the Court of First Instance
of the European Communities has ordered the removal from
the Register of Case T-68/01: Huber + Suhner MRS GmbH v
Commission of the European Communities.

(1) OJ C 212, 28.7.01.