Case T-81/02: Action brought on 18 March 2002 by Margot Wagemann-Reuter against the Court of Auditors of the European Communities
Date: 2002-06-01
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Court of Auditors, action for annulment (EU), information profession, job vacancy, promotion, regulations for civil servants, supervisor, translation

C 131/22

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

1.6.2002

Action brought on 18 March 2002 by Margot Wagemann-
Reuter against the Court of Auditors of the European
Communities

(Case T-81/02)

(2002/C 131/41)

(Language of the case: French)

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant pleads infringement of Article 40(4)(d) of the
Staff Regulations of Officials, asserting that the defendant did
not reinstate her in the post which fell vacant following the
upgrading to grade LA 4 of LA 5 posts within the German
section of the Language Service of the Court of Auditors, and
did not even examine the possibility of reinstating her in that
post.

Action brought on 25 March 2002 by Armand De Buck
against the Commission of the European Communities

An action against the Court of Auditors of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance
of the European Communities on 18 March 2002 by Margot
Wagemann-Reuter, residing in Luxembourg, represented by
Marc-Albert Lucas, lawyer.

(Case T-84/02)

(2002/C 131/42)

(Language of the case: French)

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the implicit decision of the Court of Auditors
rejecting, on 22 May 2001, her request of 18 January
2001 for reinstatement following her leave on personal
grounds;

— annul the Court of Auditors’ decision of 12 December
2001 rejecting her administrative complaint of 14 August
2001 against the first contested decision and the defend-
ant’s refusal to reinstate her in the LA 4 post of head of
translation unit which was vacant at the end of 2000 or
the beginning of 2001 within the German section of the
Language Service, or at least to consider her suitability
for the post in question;

— order the defendant to pay her, by way of compensation
for the damage to her career prospects resulting from the
illegality of the contested decisions, a sum corresponding
to the total remuneration which she would have received
had she been reinstated in that post, together with interest
at the annual rate of 8 % from the date on which those
sums would have become due until payment thereof in
full;

— order the defendant to pay her, by way of compensation
for the non-material damage suffered by her as a result of
the illegality of the contested decisions, the sum of
2 500 euros, evaluated on a fair and reasonable basis;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 25 March 2002 by Armand De
Buck, residing at Koersel
(Belgium), represented by Lucas
Vogel, lawyer, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the decision adopted by the appointing authority
on 14 December 2001 rejecting the complaint lodged by
the applicant on 19 May 2001, by which he contested
the decision of 20 February 2001 making definitive the
provisional decision of 1 July 1999 refusing to recognise
as an occupational disease the disease of the blood
suffered by the applicant;

— annul the said decisions of 20 February 2001 and 1 July

1999;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of his claim, the applicant pleads infringement of
Article 73(1) of the Staff Regulations and of Article 3 of the
Rules on the insurance of officials of the European Communi-
ties against the risk of accident and of occupational disease.
According to the applicant, the Commission committed a
manifest error of assessment, inasmuch as it based its decision
on medical documents the reasoning contained in which is
vitiated by contradictions and incorrect assessments, arising
from an erroneous analysis of the facts duly established.