Case T-323/02: Action brought on 14 October 2002 by Monique Breton against Court of Justice of the European Communities
Date: 2003-01-11
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: Court of Justice of the European Union, action for annulment (EU), regulations for civil servants, staff assessment

11.1.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 7/21

— ‘water sport tow ropes, water sport tow handles;
water sport tow floats;
inflatable tubes for rec-
reational use in water; towable water toys designed
to carry a rider; wake boards; wake board bindings;
wake board fins; water skis; trick water skis; jump
skis; water ski bindings; adjustable ski fins; water ski
boat tow harnesses; water ski gloves; knee boards;
water sport boards; water sport gear bags; water ski,
wakeboard and knee board bags; water sport goods;
dampers for use with water skis; wake boards to
limit vibration and adjust flex, all meant to be used
in international
for the practice of wakeboard’
class 28.

— order the defendant to pay the costs, fees and disburse-
ments of this case and of the previous proceedings and
appeals before OHIM Examination Division and the Third
Board of Appeal respectively.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments advanced are identical
to those put forward in Case T-318/02 (H.O. Sports Company,
Inc. / OHIM).

Action brought on 22 October 2002 by Paul Vannieuwen-
huyze-Morin against European Parliament and Council of
the European Union

(Case T-321/02)

(2003/C 7/42)

(Language of the case: French)

An action against the European Parliament and the Council of
the European Union was brought before the Court of First
Instance of the European Communities on 22 October 2002
by Paul Vannieuwenhuyze-Morin, residing in Grigny (France),
represented by Guy Dupaigne, lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul Article 13(1) and (2) of Directive 2002/58/EC of
the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July
2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the
protection of privacy in the electronic communications
sector (Directive on privacy and electronic communi-
cations), published in the Official Journal on 31 July
2002, and the words ‘either without the consent of the

subscribers concerned or’ and ‘the choice between these
options to be determined by national
in
Article 13(3);

legislation’

— make an appropriate order as to costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant, a frequent user of direct mailing over the
internet and founder of the internet site Internet-libre.net,
seeks the annulment of the abovementioned provisions of
Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of
personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic
communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic
communications) (OJ 2002 L 201, p. 37).

In support of its arguments, the applicant alleges lack of legal
basis to the contested act insofar as its adoption was not
necessary for the single market.

Furthermore, the directive in question fails to observe the right
to freedom of expression mentioned in Articles 5 of the
Declaration of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms, 11 of the
Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and 10
of the European Convention for the Protection of Human
Rights and Fundamental Freedom and the principle of free
trade recognised by all the Member States and that of free
competition, enshrined in particular in Articles 3 and 4 and
Title VI of the Treaty.

Action brought on 14 October 2002 by Monique Breton
against Court of Justice of the European Communities

(Case T-323/02)

(2003/C 7/43)

(Language of the case: French)

Justice of

An action against the Court of
the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance
of
the European Communities on 14 October 2002 by
Monique Breton, residing in Howald (Luxembourg), represent-
ed by Albert Coolen, Jean-Noël Louis and Étienne Marchal,
avocats.

C 7/22

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

11.1.2003

The applicant claims that the Court should:

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the decision of the Registrar of the Court of Justice
to award the applicant 0.58 promotion points in respect
of 1998 and to award only one promotion point per year
in respect of 1999 and 2000;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant is challenging the decision of the appointing
authority to award her 0.58 promotion points in respect of
1998 and to award her only one promotion point per year in
respect of 1999 and 2000.

The applicant claims that no staff report has been drawn up
for her throughout the period in which she worked for the
defendant as a member of the temporary staff, that is to say
from 1 June to 30 November 1998. Nor was any report
drawn up in her respect during her probation period (from
1 December 1998 to 31 August 1999). Consequently, only
the analytical assessments in the staff report for the period
from 1 September 1999 to 31 December 2000 were taken
into consideration, which prevented the appointing authority
from taking account of the applicant’s ‘merits’ as set out in the
general assessment and in the reporting officer’s observations.

In support of her claims, the applicant alleges:

— infringement of Article 45 of the Staff Regulations;

— infringement of paragraph 5 of the ‘Instructions relatives
aux promotions’ appended to the decision of the Court
of 18 October 2000;

— manifest error of assessment in the present case.

— annul the decision of 30 January 2002 of the Director
General of Directorate General A of the Council to
terminate the procedure under Article 29(1)(a) of the
Staff Regulations to fill the post of Language Adviser in
the English and Irish Language Division and to proceed
to the next stage, namely the organisation of an internal
competition under Article 29(1)(b);

— order the Council to pay to the applicant the sum of
EUR 10 000 000 by way of compensation for material
and non-material damage;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

By judgment of 14 June 2001 in Case T-230/99, the Court
of First Instance annulled the decisions of the Council of
15 December 1998 appointing Ms K to the post of language
adviser in the English Language Division and rejecting the
candidature of the applicant for the said post. The Council
appealed that judgment. The appeal was held manifestly
inadmissible
of
13 December 2001.

the Court of

by order of

Justice

The applicant claims that, in consequence of that judgment,
the Council was obliged to re-examine his application for the
post in question. By failing to carry out such re-examination,
the Council has, in the applicant’s view, infringed Article 233
of the EC Treaty. The applicant further alleges manifest error
of assessment and misuse of powers.

Action brought on 18 October 2002 by Hans Mc Auley
against Council of the European Union

(Case T-324/02)

(2003/C 7/44)

(Language of the case: French)

Action brought on 30 October 2002 by Nordspedizionieri
Danielis Livio & Co., a partnership between Livio Danielis
and Domenico D’Alessandro, in liquidation, against Com-
mission of the European Communities

(Case T-332/02)

(2003/C 7/45)

(Language of the case: Italian)

An action against the Council of the European Union was
brought before the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities on 18 October 2002 by Hans Mc Auley, residing
in Wezembeek-Oppem (Belgium), represented by Albert Cool-
en, Jean-Noël Louis and Étienne Marchal, avocats.

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 30 October 2002 by Nordspedi-
zionieri Danielis Livio & Co., a partnership between Livio
Danielis and Domenico D’Alessandro, in liquidation, represent-
ed by Gregorio Leone, lawyer.