Case T-376/03: Action brought on 10 November 2003 by Michel Hendrickx against Council of the European Union
Date: 2004-01-24
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: Council of the European Union, European official, action for annulment (EU), competition (EU), equal treatment

24.1.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 21/39

Decision of the Board of
Appeal:

Pleas in law:

Dismissal of the appeal as inad-
missible as a result of a failure
to comply with the time-limit
prescribed for lodging appeals.

— infringement of Article 6 of
the European Convention on
Human Rights in that notifi-
cation by fax does not satisfy
the requirement for security
of notification in proceed-
ings.

— in the alternative,

infringe-
ment of Rules 55, 61 and 65
of Commission Regulation
No
of
Article 59 of Regulation
No 40/94.

2868/95

and

Pleas in law and main arguments

Competition notice CONSEIL/A/270 stated that candidates
were required to have a perfect command of one of the
official languages of the European Communities, a very good
knowledge of either English or French and an adequate
knowledge of the other of those two languages. However,
candidates choosing French or English as the language of
which they had a perfect command were required to show
evidence of a very good knowledge of the other of those two
languages and also an adequate knowledge of a third official
language. By his first plea, the applicant claims that this
provision discriminates between, on the one hand, anglophone
and francophone candidates and, on the other, other candi-
dates. In that context, he relies on breach of the principle of
equal
the first
paragraph of Article 28 of the Staff Regulations. By his second
plea, the applicant claims that, at the third written test,
candidates were asked to write a brief account of the role of
the Secretariat General of the Council,
the
competition notice, which provided for an account of the
activities of the Council. The third plea refers to the Council’s
refusal to grant the applicant access to the corrected copy of
his third written test. The applicant pleads infringement of
Article 255(1) EC and also breach of the obligation to state
reasons and of the principles of good management and good
administration.

treatment and also of subparagraph f of

in breach of

Action brought on 10 November 2003 by Michel Hen-
drickx against Council of the European Union

(Case T-376/03)

(2004/C 21/81)

(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 10 November 2003 by Michel Hendrickx,
residing in Brussels, represented by Sébastien Orlandi, Albert
Coolen, Jean-Noël Louis and Etienne Marchal, lawyers, with an
address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the decisions of the Selection Board for competition
CONSEIL/A/270 to award him an eliminatory mark for
written test A.3 and not to admit him to the oral tests;

— order the Council to pay the applicant symbolic damages
of one euro for the non-pecuniary harm sustained;

Action brought on 17 November 2003 by ATI Tech-
nologies Inc. against the Office for Harmonisation in the
Internal Market

(Case T-377/03)

(2004/C 21/82)

(Language of the case: French)

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 17 November 2003 by ATI
Technologies Inc., established in Thornhill (Canada), represen-
ted by Chantal Silvia Moreau,
lawyer, with an address for
service in Luxembourg.

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Asociación de Técnicos de Informatica — ATI was also a party
to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.