Case T-208/02: Action brought on 3 July 2002 by Lene Beier against Europol
Date: 2002-08-24
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: Europol, action for annulment (EU), equal treatment, pay, staff regulations (EU)

24.8.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 202/37

Action brought on 29 June 2002 by Vassilios Tsarnavas
against Commission of the European Communities

The applicant claims that the Court should:

(Case T-200/02)

(2002/C 202/61)

(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 29 June 2002 by Vassilios Tsarna-
vas, residing in Brussels, represented by Nicolas Lhoëst, lawyer,
with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the decision of the Commission of 13 March 2002
rejecting in part the complaint lodged by the applicant
under Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations so far as
concerns his claim for compensation;

— accordingly, order

the Commission to pay him
EUR 12 500 by way of compensation for the non-
material damage suffered by him;

— order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant claims that he suffered damage as a result of the
infringement by the Commission of the General Provisions
implementing Article 43 of the Staff Regulations inasmuch as
the delay in drawing up his staff report is attributable to the
Commission.

— annul the decision of the Selection Board to exclude
the applicant from the competition following the pre-
selection tests, communicated by letter of 2 May 2002
admin. A2/5000LM — IT 001451 signed by Herik
Halskov;

— annul all other subsequent and consequent decisions
which may be adopted by the Commission with regard
to the applicant’s exclusion from the competition in
question;

— order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant in the present action contests the decision of the
Selection Board not to admit the applicant to the written tests
in general competition COM/A/10/01 Section 01/Law for
having failed to obtain sufficient marks to be included among
the 400 best candidates.

The applicant points out in that regard that, according to
the notice of the abovementioned competition, only those
candidates obtaining the 400 best marks in the pre-selection
tests were to be admitted to the competition.

In support of his arguments, the applicants alleges:

— unlawfulness of the notice of competition as contrary to
Articles 4 and 5 of Annex III to the Staff Regulations of
the European Community.

— breach of the principles of sound administration, accord-
ing to which the Commission must admit to the tests
only those candidates capable of meeting the conditions
for admission set out in the notice.

Action brought on 9 July 2002 by Nicoletta Falcone
against Commission of the European Communities

Action brought on 3 July 2002 by Lene Beier against
Europol

(Case T-207/02)

(2002/C 202/62)

(Case T-208/02)

(2002/C 202/63)

(Language of the case: Italian)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 9 July 2002 by Falcone Nicoletta,
represented by Massimo Condinanzi, lawyer.

An action against Europol was brought before the Court of
First Instance of the European Communities on 3 July 2002
by Lene Beier, residing in The Hague (Netherlands), represented
by Maria Franciscus Baltussen and Pauline de Casparis, lawyers.

C 202/38

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

24.8.2002

The applicant claims that the Court should:

The applicant claims that the Court should:

(1)

annul the tacit rejection by Europol of the applicant’s
complaint against the decision of 23 November 2001,
and at the same time annul the contested decision of
23 November 2001;

(1)

annul the tacit rejection by Europol of the applicant’s
complaint against the decision of 23 November 2001,
and at the same time annul the contested decision of
23 November 2001;

(2) order Europol, primarily, to award the applicant two
additional salary increments, effective from 1 July 2001;
alternatively, order Europol to award the applicant one
additional salary increment, effective from 1 July 2001;

(3) order Europol to pay to the applicant, within 48 hours
after delivery of the judgment to be given in this case,
what is due to her thereunder, together with interest at
the statutory rate prescribed by Netherlands law;

(4) order Europol to pay to the applicant, within 48 hours
after delivery of the judgment to be given in this case, the
sum of 1 000 euros by way of compensation for the non-
material damage suffered by her;

(5) order Europol to indemnify the applicant in respect of

the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant is employed at Europol. The contested decision
adopted by the defendant did not award the applicant a salary
increase to which she considers herself to be entitled.

The applicant claims that the decision in question infringes
Article 29 of the Europol Staff Regulations. According to the
applicant, the Management Board has failed to lay down the
necessary rules for the award of salary increases in accordance
with that article. The applicant further pleads that the Director
exceeded his discretionary powers, inasmuch as the decision-
making procedure does not satisfy the requirements of regard
for the welfare and interests of staff and of impartiality. Lastly,
the applicant pleads infringement of the principles of equal
treatment and of the protection of legitimate expectations.

Action brought on 5 July 2002 by Andreas Mausolf
against Europol

(Case T-209/02)

(2002/C 202/64)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

(2) order Europol to award the applicant two additional

salary increments, effective from 1 July 2001;

(3) order Europol to pay to the applicant, within 48 hours
after delivery of the judgment to be given in this case,
what is due to him thereunder, together with interest at
the statutory rate prescribed by Netherlands law;

(4) order Europol to indemnify the applicant in respect of

the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant is employed at Europol. The contested decision
adopted by the defendant did not award the applicant a salary
increase to which he considers himself to be entitled.

The applicant claims that the decision in question infringes
Article 29 of the Europol Staff Regulations. According to the
applicant, the Management Board has failed to lay down the
necessary rules for the award of salary increases in accordance
with that article. The applicant further pleads that the Director
exceeded his discretionary powers, inasmuch as the decision-
making procedure does not satisfy the requirements of regard
for the welfare and interests of staff and of impartiality. Lastly,
the applicant pleads infringement of the principles of equal
treatment and of the protection of legitimate expectations.

Removal from the register of Case T-258/97 (1)

(2002/C 202/65)

(Language of the Case: Italian)

By order of 12 June 2002 the President of the Fourth Chamber
of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities
ordered the removal from the register of Case T-258/97:
Società Eridania SpA and Others v Council of the European
Union.

An action against Europol was brought before the Court of
First Instance of the European Communities on 5 July 2002
by Andreas Mausolf, residing at Leiden (Netherlands), rep-
resented by Maria Franciscus Baltussen and Pauline de Casparis,
lawyers.

(1) OJ C 357 of 22.11.1997.