Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 30 September 2003 in Case T-296/01, Antonio Tatti v Commission of the European Communities (Community officials — Staff report — Tardiness — Irregularities in reporting procedure — Action for annulment — Action for damages)
Date: 2003-11-29
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, European official, action for annulment (EU), appointment of staff, staff assessment

29.11.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 289/21

Baere, lawyer, with an address for service in Luxembourg, v
Commission of the European Communities (Agent: R. Wain-
wright): Application for annulment of Commission Regulation
(EC) No 1400/2001 of 10 July 2001 concerning the classifi-
cation of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature (OJ
2001 L 189, p. 5); corrigendum published in the German,
English, Finnish, Portuguese and Swedish editions (OJ 2001
L 191, p. 49), the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber),
composed of: K. Lenaerts, President, J. Azizi and M. Jaeger,
Judges; J. Plingers, Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a
judgment on 30 September 2003, in which it:

1. Annuls Commission Regulation (EC) No 1400/2001 of
10 July 2001 concerning the classification of certain goods in
the Combined Nomenclature (OJ 2001 L 189, p. 5) in so far
as it classifies the console described in column 1 of the table in
the Annex to that regulation under CN Code 9504 10 00 and
the accompanying CD-ROM under CN Code 8524 39 90;

1. Annuls the decision adopting the decision adopting the appli-
cant’s definitive staff report for the period 1 July 1995 to
30 June 1997.

2. Orders the Commission to pay the applicant EUR 1 500 by

way of compensation for non-material damages.

3. Orders the Commission to pay the costs.

(1) OJ 2002 C 56 of 2.3.02.

2. Dismisses the request for production of the defendant’s legal

opinion;

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

3. Orders the defendant to pay all the costs.

(1) OJ C 3 of 5.1.2002.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 30 September 2003

in Case T-296/01, Antonio Tatti v Commission of the
European Communities (1)

(Community officials — Staff report — Tardiness —
Irregularities in reporting procedure — Action for annul-
ment — Action for damages)

(2003/C 289/44)

(Language of the case: French)

In Case T-296/01, Antonio Tatti, official of the Commission
of the European Communities, residing in Overijse (Belgium),
represented by L. Vogel, lawyer, with an address for service
in Luxembourg, against the Commission of the European
Communities (Agent: C. Berardis-Kayser), application, first, for
annulment of the decision adopting the applicant’s definitive
staff report for the period 1 July 1995 to 30 June 1997 and,
second, for damages, the Court of First
Instance (Fourth
Chamber), composed of V. Tiili, President, and P. Mengozzi
and M. Vilaras, Judges; D. Christensen, Administrator, for the
Registrar, has given a judgment on 30 September 2003, in
which it:

of 30 September 2003

in Case T-214/02, María-Angeles Martínez Valls v Euro-
pean Parliament (1)

(Community officials — Competition — Non-admission to
oral tests — Access to documents)

(2003/C 289/45)

(Language of the case: French)

In Case T-214/02, María-Angeles Martínez Valls, residing in
Brussels (Belgium), represented by Georges Vandersanden and
lawyers, against the European Parliament (Agents:
L. Levi,
H. von Hertzen and D. Moore) — application, first,
for
annulment of the letters of 3 April and 31 May 2002 by which
the Selection Board found that the applicant had obtained
insufficient marks in the written tests in competition PE/90/A
and, with respect to the letter of 31 May 2002, by which the
Selection Board rejected the applicant’s request seeking access
to certain documents and, second, for compensation for the
loss suffered as a result of those letters, the Court of First
Instance (Fifth Chamber), composed of R. García-Valdecasas,
President, and P. Lindh and J.D. Cooke, Judges, I. Natsinas,
Administrator for the Registrar, has given a judgment on
30 September 2003, in which it:

1. Holds that there is no need to rule on the application for
annulment of the letter of 31 May 2002 in so far as it rejects
the request for access to documents.

2. Orders the Parliament to pay the applicant EUR 1 by way of

damages for non-material damage.