Case C-488/01 P: Appeal brought on 17 December 2001 by J.C. Martinez against the judgment of 2 October 2001 delivered by the Third Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities in Joined Cases T-222/99, T-327/99 and T-329/99 between J.C. Martinez and Ch. de Gaulle, the Front National, E. Bonino and Others and the European Parliament
Date: 2002-04-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: France, General Court (EU), Member of the European Parliament, action for annulment (EU), constitutional law, operation of the Institutions, political parties

C 84/48

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

6.4.2002

that

treatment

this unequal

is discrimination between MEP’s who are members of a
it refuses to
political group and non-attached MEP’s,
is a ground for
accept
annulment of the contested measure. Even though an
exception of the illegality of Rule 29(1) of the rules has
not been raised by the applicants, it is nevertheless the
case that the members of the TDI group suffer from
discriminatory treatment in the light of the contested
decision.

The Court of First Instance has not drawn the correct
inferences from the abandonment by the European
Parliament of its previous practice, nor from the unequal
treatment imposed on the TDI group in comparison
with the ‘Groupe pour l’Europe des démocraties et des
différences’. Lastly, the Court of First Instance could not
reject the observations evidencing the political affinity of
the TDI group, even though the facts relied on post-date
the contested measure.

— Failure to observe the regulatory traditions common
to the Member States:
in refusing to draw the legal
consequences from comparative law and to find discrimi-
nation by the measure at
the Court of First
Instance fails to apply the rules and principles governing
Community law.

issue,

— Infringement of essential procedural requirements: the
scope of the contested measure is wider than that of
interpretation of the rules.

— Presumption of misuse of procedure: the Court of First
Instance fails to appreciate the reality of the misuse of
procedure which may be inferred from various examples
of amendments to the rules, clearly showing that there is
indeed a desire on the part of the European Parliament to
reduce systematically the rights of some of its members.

Appeal brought on 17 December 2001 by J.C. Martinez
against the judgment of 2 October 2001 delivered by the
Third Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities
in Joined Cases T-222/99,
T-327/99 and T-329/99 between J.C. Martinez and Ch. de
Gaulle, the Front National, E. Bonino and Others and the
European Parliament

(Case C-488/01 P)

(2002/C 84/83)

An appeal against the judgment delivered on 2 October 2001
by the Third Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the

European Communities in Joined Cases T-222/99, T-327/99
and T-329/99 between J.C. Martinez and Ch. de Gaulle, the
Front National, E. Bonino and Others and the European
Parliament was brought before the Court of Justice of the
European Communities on 17 December 2001 by J.C.
Martinez.

The appellant claims that the Court should:

— declare admissible the appeal brought by Mr Martinez
against the judgment of 2 October 2001 of the Court of
First Instance of the European Communities,

— find that there has been an infringement of Community

law by the Court of First Instance,

— quash the limbs and grounds of the contested judgment

in whole or in part,

— rule in accordance with the law, set aside the contested
judgment, or, in the alternative, remit the case to the
Court of First Instance of the European Communities
pursuant to Article 54 of the Statute of the Court of
Justice,

— order the European Parliament to pay the whole of the

costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Four pleas are identical to the first four pleas submitted in Case
C-486/01 P (1).

— Infringement of the principle of democracy: the Court of
First Instance wrongly rejected this plea on the basis of a
failure to raise an objection of
illegality against the
Parliament’s Rules of Procedure.

— Infringement of the principle of freedom of association:
the Court of First Instance does not show how the fact of
making the constitution of a group of MEP’s subject to a
requirement of political affinities constitutes a legitimate
ground if this maintains discrimination between non-
attached MEP’s and members of a constituted political
group.

(1) See page 47 of this Official Journal.