Case T-96/02: Action brought on 29 March 2002 by Hugh McBryan against the Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2002-06-01
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, European official, action for annulment (EU), equal treatment, pension scheme, servant (EU)

1.6.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 131/23

Action brought on 28 March 2002 by Confédération
Nationale du Crédit Mutuel against Commission of the
European Communities

In the alternative, the applicant claims that, assuming that aid
was granted, it cannot be deemed to be existing aid pursuant
to Article 15(3) of Regulation No 659/1999. (1)

(Case T-93/02)

(2002/C 131/43)

(Language of the case: French)

Pursuant to Article 15 of that regulation, the Commission
has been barred from recovering aid since 1985 and the
Commission has infringed the general principle of Community
law which requires it to adopt a decision within a reasonable
period. Moreover, the contested decision does not contain any
evidence that the aid was in existence when the Livret Bleu
was set up, which is a logical and legal condition which must
be met if aid is to be described as new.

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 28 March 2002 by Confédération
Nationale du Crédit Mutuel, established in Paris, represented
by Alexandre Carnelutti, lawyer.

Finally, the applicant claims that the Commission infringed
Article 14 of Regulation No 659/1999, Article 253 of the EC
Treaty and the principle of sound administration, impartiality
and fairness.

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying
down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC
Treaty (OJ L 83, 1999, p. 1).

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul in its entirety the decision of the Commission of
15 January 2002 declaring incompatible with the com-
mon market state aid implemented by the French Repub-
lic in favour of Crédit Mutuel;

— in the alternative, annul Article 2 thereof in so far as it

orders recovery of the aid identified;

— order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Action brought on 29 March 2002 by Hugh McBryan
against the Commission of the European Communities

The Livret Bleu is a tax-free savings product intended for the
general public the tax advantage of which directly benefits
the consumer. The applicant was entrusted by the French
authorities in 1975 with the exclusive distribution of that
savings book. In the contested decision, the Commission found
that the applicant benefited from an overcompensation by the
French State for the running costs of the Livret Bleu, which is
incompatible with the State aid rules of the EC Treaty.

(Case T-96/02)

(2002/C 131/44)

(Language of the case: French)

that

claims

applicant

The
the Commission infringed
Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty in finding that there was aid.
The Commission applied an unreasonable global method
which is unjustified in the present case and it wrongly identified
funding as State resources. Furthermore, it committed manifest
errors of assessment by refusing to take into consideration
the costs incurred, which were properly identified, and by
endorsing the view taken by the Commission’s consultant.

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 29 March 2002 by Hugh McBryan,
residing in Brussels, represented by Jean-Noël Louis, lawyer,
with an address for service in Luxembourg.

C 131/24

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

1.6.2002

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— order the Commission to pay the costs.

— annul the Commission’s decision establishing the calcu-
lation of the pension rights acquired by the applicant
prior to his entry into service and transferred to the
Community pension scheme pursuant to Article 11(2) of
Annex VIII of the Staff Regulations;

— order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of his claim, the applicant pleads non-compliance
with the obligation to provide a statement of reasons and
infringement of Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff
Regulations and of the general provisions for the implemen-
tation thereof, as well as breach of the principle of equal
treatment. According to the applicant, the calculation should
have been carried out on the basis of his situation at the time
of entering the service of the Communities as a member of the
temporary staff, and not on the basis of his situation at the
time of his being appointed as an established official, some
nine years later.

Action brought on 2 April 2002 by Prodromos Mavridis
against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-97/02)

(2002/C 131/45)

(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 2 April 2002 by Prodromos
Mavridis, residing in Brussels, represented by Jean-Noël Louis,
lawyer, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of his claim, the applicant pleads infringement of
Article 45 of the Staff Regulations and of the principles of
equal treatment and career progression. According to the
applicant, his merits were not taken fully into consideration in
the context of the 2001 promotions procedure.

Action brought on 11 April 2002 by Bolloré S.A. against
Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-109/02)

(2002/C 131/46)

(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 11 April 2002 by Bolloré S.A.,
established in Puteaux (France), represented by Robert Saint-
Esteben and Hugues Calvet, lawyers, with an address for service
in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— Annul Articles 1, 2 and 3 of the Commission decision of
20 December 2001, reference COMP/E-1/36212 —
Carbonless paper, relating to a proceeding pursuant to
Article 81 of the EC Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA
Agreement, in so far as they refer to Bolloré;

— In the alternative, reduce very substantially the amount
of the fine imposed on Bolloré by Article 3 of the
decision;

— Order the Commission to pay the costs.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Pleas in law and main arguments

— annul the Commission’s decision not to promote the
applicant to grade A 5 in the context of the 2001
promotions procedure;

The applicant contests the Commission’s decision finding that
it took part in an agreement contrary to Article 81(1) of the
EC Treaty and Article 53(1) of the EEA Agreement.