Case T-14/03: Action brought on 10 January 2003 by Colette Di Marzio against Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2003-04-05
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, European official, action for annulment (EU), indemnification, reassignment

C 83/20

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

5.4.2003

1. Annuls the Commission’s decision of 25 November 1999
refusing to award an orphan’s pension to the applicant’s child;

Action brought on 10 January 2003 by Colette Di Marzio
against Commission of the European Communities

2. Orders the Commission to pay the costs, except those incurred
by the Council of the European Union and those incurred by
the applicant as a consequence of the Council’s intervention;

3. Orders the Council to bear its own costs.

( 1) OJ C 335, 25 November 2000.

(Case T-14/03)

(2003/C 83/47)

(Language of the case: French)

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 28 January 2003

in Case T-138/01: F v Court of Auditors of the European
Communities (1)

(Officials — Reassignment — Legitimate expectations —
Action for annulment and compensation)

(2003/C 83/46)

(Language of the case: French)

In Case T-138/01: F, an official of the Court of Auditors of the
European Communities, residing in Luxembourg, represented
by P. Goergen, lawyer, with an address for service in Luxem-
bourg, against Court of Auditors of the European Communities
(Agents: J.-M. Stenier, P. Giusta and B. Schäfer) — application,
firstly, for annulment of the decision of the Court of Auditors
of 4 December 2000 reassigning the applicant to the trans-
lation service and, secondly, for compensation for the non-
material damage alleged by the applicant, the Court (Second
Chamber), composed of R.M. Moura Ramos, President, and
J. Pirrung and A.W.H. Meij, Judges; J. Plingers, Administrator,
for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 28 January 2003,
in which it:

1. Annuls the decision of the Court of Auditors of 4 December
2000 reassigning the applicant to the translation service.

2. Dismisses the remainder of the application.

3. Orders the Court of Auditors to pay the costs, including those
relating to the interlocutory proceedings in Case T-138/01 R.

( 1) OJ C 259 of 15.9.2001.

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 10 January 2003 by Colette Di
Marzio, residing in Ginasservis (France), represented by Geor-
ges Vandersanden and Laure Levi, lawyers.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the appointing authority’s decision to make a
deduction from the applicant’s salary corresponding, for
the months of October, November and December 2001,
to the weighting for France and the expatriation allow-
ance;

— annul the decision of an unknown date depriving the
applicant of the fixed allowance (the ‘secretarial allow-
ance’) referred to in Article 4a of Annex VII to the Staff
Regulations with effect from October 2000;

— annul the decision of an unknown date depriving the
applicant of the annual travel allowance provided for in
Article 8 of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations for 2001;

— reinstate all the applicant’s pecuniary rights, which entails
payment of the weighting for France and the expatriation
allowance for October, November and December 2001;
payment of the fixed allowance (the ‘secretarial allow-
ance’) referred to in Article 4a of Annex VII to the Staff
Regulations for the period from 1 January 2001; payment
of the annual travel allowance provided for in Article 8
of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations for the whole of
2001; plus interest on all those amounts at the rate of
5,25 % per annum until full payment is made;

— order the defendant to pay damages assessed, on an

equitable basis, at EUR 10 000;

— order the defendant to pay all the costs.

5.4.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 83/21

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant is an official of the Commission. She was
assigned to Cadarache and then reassigned to Brussels. The
applicant challenged the decision to reassign her in Case
T-355/01, which resulted in a settlement being reached with
the Commission and in the applicant’s being seconded to
Cadarache. However, the Commission took the view that the
applicant had received the weighting for France and the
expatriation allowance without being entitled to do so. The
applicant was also deprived of the ‘secretarial allowance’ and
of the fixed allowance for travelling expenses.

In support of her action, the applicant claims that there has
been an infringement of Articles 59 and 64 of the Staff
Regulations and Article 4 of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations
and an infringement of Article 71 of the Staff Regulations and
Articles 5 to 10 of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations. The
applicant also claims that there has been a breach of the
obligation to state reasons and an infringement of the principle
of non-discrimination.

In the alternative, as regards the weighting for France and the
expatriation allowance, the applicant claims that there has
been an infringement of Article 85 of the Staff Regulations.
The applicant also claims that there has been an infringement
of Article 4a of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations, an
infringement of the general principle that an institution must
comply with the rules which it itself has made and a breach of
the obligation to state reasons as regards the secretarial
allowance.

Last, the applicant claims that there has been an infringement
of the general principle of sound management and good
administration and a breach of the duty to have regard for the
welfare of officials.

— award EUR 1 000 by way of damages as compensation
for non-material damage, that amount being fixed ex
aequo et bono;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

By his action the applicant, an official of the Commission,
challenges the validity of his staff report for the period 1995-
1997 and claims damages for the faults allegedly committed
by the Commission in preparing that report.

He claims that the report infringes Article 43 of the Staff
Regulations and the provisions of the Guide to Staff Reports.
Thus, notwithstanding the opinion of the Joint Committee
on Staff Reports pointing out significant procedural and
substantive irregularities, the appeal assessor did not find it
necessary to correct them. In addition, that the report was
completed after an unreasonable period of time was the
Commission’s fault alone. Similarly, the assessors systemati-
cally refused to hold a prior interview with the applicant as
provided for by the Guide to Staff Reports. Furthermore, the
quite irregular drafting of the report reflected a more general
‘mobbing’ attitude from which the applicant had suffered for
some years.

The applicant claims that the very negative assessments in his
report are clearly unfounded and that the Commission has
failed in its duty to have regard for the interests of officials and
has failed to observe the principle of sound administration.

Action brought on 13 January 2003 by Albano Ferrer de
Moncada against Commission of the European Communi-
ties

(Case T-16/03)

(2003/C 83/48)

(Language of the case: French)

An action against Commission of the European Communities
was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities on 13 January 2003 by Albano Ferrer de
Moncada, residing in Luxembourg, represented by Georges
Vandersanden, Laure Levi and Aurore Finchelstein, lawyers.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul his staff report for the reference period 1995-1997;

Action brought on 22 January 2003 by Spyridoula Kon-
stantopoulou against Court of Justice of the European
Communities

(Case T-19/03)

(2003/C 83/49)

(Language of the case: French)

An action against the Court of
the European
Communities was brought before the Court of Justice of the
European Communities on 22 January 2003 by Spyridoula
Konstantopoulou, residing in Ioannina (Greece), represented
by Eric Boigelot, lawyer.

Justice of