Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 12 November 2002 in Case T-271/01: José Manuel López Cejudo v Commission of the European Communities (Officials — Remuneration — Dependent child and education allowances paid to the parent awarded custody of the child — Refusal to grant the other parent payment of the allowances for the purpose of calculating tax rebate and expatriation allowance — Default interest)
Date: 2003-01-25
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, European official, action for annulment (EU), dependant, family benefit, maintenance obligation

25.1.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 19/33

O. Slusny, lawyer, with an address for service in Luxembourg,
against Commission of the European Communities (Agent:
J. Currall) — application for the annulment of the implied
rejection of the complaint lodged by the applicant against the
decision of
the office responsible for settling claims of
30 November 2000 refusing to reimburse expenses relating to
medicinal preparations prescribed by the doctor providing
treatment — the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber),
composed of M. Jaeger, President, K. Lenaerts and J. Azizi,
Judges; D. Christensen, Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a
judgment on 7 November 2002, in which it:

1. Dismisses the application.

2. Orders the parties to bear their own costs.

( 1) OJ C 317 of 10.11.2001.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 5 November 2002

in Case T-205/01: André Ronsse v Commission of the
European Communities (1)

(Officials — Remuneration — Household allowance —
Recovery of sum overpaid)

(2003/C 19/62)

(Language of the case: French)

In Case T-205/01: André Ronsse, an official of the Commission
of the European Communities, residing in Brussels, represented
by E. Boigelot, lawyer, with an address for service in Luxem-
bourg, against Commission of the European Communities
(Agents: J. Currall, F. Clotuche-Duvieusart and B. Wägenbaur)
— application for, first, annulment of the decisions of the
Commission contained in letters of 9 and 23 November 2000
and in so far as necessary in the letter of 15 January 2002 and
the implied rejection of his complaint lodged on 8 February
2001, all relating to repayment of EUR 22 443,07 correspond-
ing to the household allowance paid to the applicant from
1 January 1994 to 1 November 2000 and, secondly, reim-
bursement of the amounts withheld from his pension since
December 2000, together with interest at the statutory rate —
the Court of First Instance (First Chamber), composed of
B. Vesterdorf, President, N.J. Forwood and H. Legal, Judges;
J. Palacio González, Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a
judgment on 5 November 2002, in which it:

1. Dismisses the application.

2. Orders the parties to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 317 of 10.11.2001.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 12 November 2002

in Case T-271/01: José Manuel López Cejudo v Com-
mission of the European Communities (1)

(Officials — Remuneration — Dependent child and edu-
cation allowances paid to the parent awarded custody of the
child — Refusal to grant the other parent payment of the
allowances for the purpose of calculating tax rebate and
expatriation allowance — Default interest)

(2003/C 19/63)

(Language of the case: French)

In Case T-271/01: José Manuel López Cejudo, an official
working for the Commission of the European Communities,
residing in Brussels, represented by G. Vandersanden and
L. Levi, avocats, with an address for service in Luxembourg,
against Commission of the European Communities (Agent:
J. Currall) — First an application for annulment of the decision
of the Commission refusing to grant to the applicant, in
respect of the period running from October 2000 to July
2001, the dependent child and education allowances for the
purpose of calculating tax abatement and the expatriation
allowance and, second, a claim for default interest on the
amounts improperly recovered or not paid — the Court of
First Instance (Second Chamber), composed of R.M. Moura
Ramos, President, J. Pirrung and A.W.H. Meij, Judges; J. Pling-
ers, Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a judgment on
12 November 2002, in which it:

1.

the Commission, as evidenced by
annuls the decision of
the applicant’s salary slip for October 2000, refusing him
entitlement to dependent child and education allowances to take
into account for purposes of tax abatement and expatriation
allowance since July 1999, as amended by the Commission’s
decision of 16 July 2001, insofar as the latter decision takes
account of
to the
allowances in issue and of the benefits under them only in
respect of the future.

the apportionment of

the entitlement

2.

orders the Commission to pay to the applicant:

— default interest, as from November 2000, on the capital
amount of EUR 1 193,85 and, for each month from
2001,
December
EUR 1 200 each month until those capital amounts are
repaid to him;

September

2000

until

and

C 19/34

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

25.1.2003

— default interest in respect of the benefits accruing to the
applicant under the allowances in issue, for each month
from October 2000 until the date on which the decision
of 16 July 2001 takes effect, until full payment of the
amounts due.

3.

orders the rate of default interest to be calculated on the basis
of the rate fixed by the European Central Bank for main
refinancing operations, applicable in the period in question,
plus two points.

4.

orders the Commission to pay the costs.

( 1) OJ C 3 of 5.1.2002.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 25 October 2002

in Case T-80/02: Tetra Laval BV v Commission of the
European Communities (1)

(Competition — Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 — Decision
ordering separation of undertakings — Article 8(4) of
Regulation No 4064/89 — Illegality of the decision declaring
a concentration incompatible with the common market —
Ensuing illegality of the divestiture decision)

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 25 October 2002

in Case T-5/02: Tetra Laval BV v Commission of the
European Communities (1)

(Competition — Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 — Decision
declaring a concentration incompatible with the common
market — Rights of the defence — Horizontal and vertical
effects — Foreseeable conglomerate effects — Leveraging —
Potential competition — General effect of reinforcement)

(2003/C 19/64)

(Language of the case: English)

In Case T-5/02, Tetra Laval BV, established in Amsterdam
(Netherlands), represented by A. Vandencasteele, D. Wael-
broeck, A. Weitbrecht and S. Völcker, lawyers, v Commission
the European Communities (Agents: A. Whelan and
of
P. Hellström): Application for annulment of Commission
Decision C (2001) 3345 final of 30 October 2001 declaring a
concentration to be incompatible with the common market
and the EEA Agreement (Case No COMP/M.2416 — Tetra
Instance (First Chamber),
Laval/Sidel),
composed of: B. Vesterdorf, President, J. Pirrung and N.J. For-
wood, Judges; D. Christensen, Administrator, for the Registrar,
has given a judgment on 25 October 2002, in which it:

the Court of First

1. Annuls Commission Decision C (2001) 3345 final of
30 October 2001 declaring a concentration to be incompatible
with the common market and the EEA Agreement (Case
No COMP/M.2416 — Tetra Laval/Sidel);

2. Orders the Commission to bear its own costs and to pay the

costs of the applicant.

( 1) OJ C 68 of 16.3.2002.

(2003/C 19/65)

(Language of the case: English)

In Case T-80/02, Tetra Laval BV, established in Amsterdam
(Netherlands), represented by A. Vandencasteele, D. Wael-
broeck, A. Weitbrecht and S. Völcker, lawyers, v Commission
of
the European Communities (Agents: A. Whelan and
P. Hellström): Application for annulment of the Commission
Decision of 30 January 2002 setting out measures in order to
restore conditions of effective competition pursuant to Article
8(4) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 of 21 December
1989 on the control of concentrations between undertakings
(Case No COMP/M.2416 — Tetra Laval/Sidel), the Court of
First Instance (First Chamber), composed of: B. Vesterdorf,
President, J. Pirrung and N. J. Forwood, Judges; D. Christensen,
Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on
25 October 2002, in which it:

(1) Annuls the Commission Decision of 30 January 2002
setting out measures in order to restore conditions of effective
competition pursuant to Article 8(4) of Council Regulation
(EEC) No 4064/89 of 21 December 1989 on the control of
concentrations between undertakings
(Case No COMP/
M.2416 — Tetra Laval/Sidel);

(2) Orders the Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those
including those relating to the interim

the applicant,

of
proceedings.

(1) OJ C 156 of 29.6.2002.