Case T-230/02: Action brought on 2 August 2002 by X against Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2002-10-12
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, European official, action for annulment (EU), psychological harassment

C 247/20

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

12.10.2002

Action brought on 26 July 2002 by the Organisation des
Modjahedines du Peuple d’Iran (OMPI) against the Council
of the European Union

(Case T-228/02)

(2002/C 247/31)

(Language of the case: French)

An action against the Council of the European Union was
brought before the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities on 26 July 2002 by the Organisation des
Modjahedines du Peuple d’Iran (People’s Mujahidin of Iran)
(OMPI) established in Auvers sur Oise (France), represented by
Jean-Pierre Spitzer, Lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— partially annul Council Decision 2002/460/EC of 17 June
2002 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation (EC)
No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed
against certain persons and entities with a view to
combating terrorism and repealing Decision 2002/334/
EC;

— partially annul Common Position 2002/462/CFSP of
17 June 2002 updating Common Position 2001/931/
CFSP on the application of specific measures to combat
terrorism and repealing Common Position 2002/340/
CFSP;

— partially annul Common Position 2002/340/CFSP of
2 May 2002 updating Common Position 2001/931/CFSP
on the application of specific measures to combat
terrorism, revising the list of persons covered;

In support of its claims, the applicant pleads:

— Breach of its rights of defence in that it was not given the
opportunity to be heard before being included in the
contested lists.

— In the alternative, failure to have regard to the right to
revolt against tyranny and oppression as a superior rule
of law. It observes in this regard that it is conducting
legitimate resistance against the Iranian regime, while
complying with the fundamental principles of democracy
and of respect for human rights. Its resistance is, more-
over, supported by the international community.

— In the further alternative, breach of the principle of non-
discrimination, both in relation to the organisations
which are included in the list and in relation to those that
are not, for example Al-Qaida. It points out in this regard
that, unlike almost all the organisations included in the
list, it is not opposing a democratic regime, that it has
never undertaken actions against civilians and that it is
the only resistance movement which is acting within
Iran’s borders and defending peace in the region.

Action brought on 2 August 2002 by X against Com-
mission of the European Communities

(Case T-230/02)

(2002/C 247/32)

— declare all
applicant;

those legislative texts inapplicable to the

(Language of the case: French)

— order the Council of the European Union to pay OMPI

the sum of EUR 1 for harm suffered;

— order the Council of the European Union to pay all 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 2 August 2002 by X, represented
by Gilles Bounéou, lawyer.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant organisation seeks annulment of the legislative
texts which are the subject-matter of the present action in so
far as they expressly refer to it. The applicant states in this
regard that inclusion in the contested lists is a penalty which
causes it considerable harm, if only because it is equiparated
with terrorist organisations denounced by it.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— order the defendant to pay EUR 75 000 by way of
compensation or any other amount to be determined ex
aequo et bono by the Court;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

12.10.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 247/21

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant, a former Commission official, claims that he
was the victim of harassment by the Commission. He alleges,
in that respect, wilful failure to implement a judgment of the
Court of First Instance (1), breach of the obligation to provide
reasons, breach of the principle of equal treatment and of non-
discrimination and breach by the Commission of its duty to
have regard for the welfare of officials.

( 1) Case T-214/00 X v Commission [2001] ECR FP-IA-143 ; FP-II-

663.

Action brought on 8 August 2002 by Commonfood
Handelsgesellschaft für Agrar-Produkte mbH against the
Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-239/02)

(2002/C 247/34)

(Language of the case: German)

Action brought on 2 August 2002 by Christos Michael
against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-234/02)

(2002/C 247/33)

(Language of the case: Greek)

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 8 August 2002 by Commonfood
Handelsgesellschaft für Agrar-Produkte mbH, of Langen (Ger-
many), represented by K. Landry and L. Harings, lawyers.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the Commission’s decision No REC 4/01 of 5 March

2002;

— order the defendant to reimburse to the applicant the

costs necessarily incurred in the proceedings.

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 2 August 2002 by Christos
Michael, resident
in Brussels, represented by K. Tagaras,
Lawyer.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— allow the application;

— annul the contested measures;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

This is an action challenging the decision concerning the
appointment of officials to the posts of Deputy Head of Unit
DG FC.A.1 and Head of the Sector ‘Politiques internes et
Agences’ in that unit.

On the basis of oral information provided by the competent
customs authority, to the effect that production of import
certificates for the importation of chickens in the context of
two specific quotas was not necessary, the applicant on 24 July
1995 submitted a declaration in respect of the import in
several consignments of frozen chicken pieces originating in
Thailand under CN Code No 0207 41 10. — The competent
principal customs office initially granted relief from import
duties, but subsequently charged the applicant import duties
amounting to EUR 113 566,14. The applicant raised an
objection to that decision and the national authorities referred
the matter to the Commission for a decision. By the contested
decision, the Commission found that the import duties were
to be entered in the accounts after the event.

The pleas in law and arguments correspond to those advanced
in Case T-309/01 Peter Biegi Nahrungsmittel GmbH v Com-
mission (1).

The applicant pleads infringement of Articles 5, 25, 43 and 45
of the Staff Regulations and of the principle of equal treatment.
He also claims that there was a manifest error of assessment
and misuse of powers in making the contested appointments.

(1) OJ C 56 of 2.3.2002, p. 14.