Case T-432/03: Action brought on 22 December 2003 by Jean Dehon against the European Parliament
Date: 2004-02-21
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Parliament, European civil service, action for annulment (EU), competition (EU), regulations for civil servants

C 47/38

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

21.2.2004

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant claims that the Court should:

The applicant, who was classified in Grade A7, Step 3, upon
entering the service of the Commission in September 1986,
challenges the decision of the appointing authority, adopted
following a reconsideration of that classification following the
judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C-389/98 P Gevaert v
Commission, to reclassify him in Step 1 of Grade A6, instead
of Step 3 of that grade, and revising and setting at new dates
his subsequent classification in Grade A5, Step 2, and A4,
Step 2, and limiting the pecuniary effects of that reclassification
to 5 October 1995.

In support of his claims, action, the applicant claims that the
Commission has breached:

— the decisions of 6 June 1973 and 1 September 1983 in
so far as it omitted to grant the applicant the slightest
seniority in step, and also Article 5(3) of
the Staff
Regulations in so far as the Commission applied to the
applicant a different outcome from that of officials in the
same category;

— Articles 5(3) and 45 of the Staff Regulations by refusing
to reconstruct his career in grade following his reclassifi-
cation in Grade A6, and breach of the duty to have regard
to the welfare of officials;

— Article 62 of the Staff Regulations by limiting in time the

pecuniary effects of his reclassification.

— Annul the decision of the selection board in competition
COM/TB/99 to award the applicant an insufficient mark
in the oral test to allow him to be entered on the reserve
list;

— Order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Following the judgment of the Court of First Instance on
13 March 2002 in Case T-364/00 Van Weyenbergh, the
applicant in the present case, as in Case T-161/01, objects to
the decision of the selection board in competition COM/TB/
99 constituting a reserve list of administrative assistants,
senior administrative assistants and principal administrative
assistants, in Grades B5/B4, B3/B2 and B1 respectively, not to
enter him on the reserve list in that competition on the ground
that he was awarded an insufficient mark in the oral test.

In support of his claims, he alleges that there has been a
breach of the principles of non-discrimination and proper
administration and also a manifest error of assessment.

The applicant criticises the method used by the selection board
to assess his knowledge of languages and claims, in particular,
that he was unable to ascertain whether the questions put
during the oral test correspond to the level of the competition
B5/B4, B3/B2 or B1.

Action brought on 22 December 2003 by Liam O’Bra-
daigh against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties

Action brought on 22 December 2003 by Jean Dehon
against the European Parliament

(Case T-431/03)

(2004/C 47/71)

(Case T-432/03)

(2004/C 47/72)

(Language of the case: French)

(Language of the case: French)

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 22 December 2003 by Liam
O’Bradaigh, residing in Mechelen (Belgium), represented by
Sébastien Orlandi, Albert Coolen, Jean-Noël Louis and Étienne
Marchal, lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

An action against the European Parliament was brought before
the Court of First Instance of the European Communities
on 22 December 2003 by Jean Dehon, residing in Hagen
(Luxembourg),
represented by Sébastien Orlandi, Albert
Coolen, Jean-Noël Louis and Étienne Marchal, lawyers, with an
address for service in Luxembourg.

21.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 47/39

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— Annul the decision of the European Parliament to move
on to the recruiting phase provided for in Article 29(1)(b)
of the Staff Regulations, namely the organisation of an
internal competition, in order to fill the post of Deputy
Head of Division of the French Translation Division
(Vacancy Notice No 9192);

— Order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

first,
In support of his application, the applicant alleges,
infringement of Article 233 of the EC Treaty inasmuch as the
Parliament failed to comply properly with the judgment of the
Court of First
Instance of 15 November 2000 in Case
T-261/99 Dehon v Parliament. The applicant further alleges
infringement of Article 29(1)(a) of the Staff Regulations and
breach of the principle that officials must have reasonable
career prospects.

‘Messina-Palermo motorway major project’,
Gibbesi’,
‘Aragona Favara’ and ‘Piana di Catania’, and all other acts
resulting from it; Order the Commission of the European
Communities to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Instance of

The Regione Siciliana has brought an action before the Court
of First
the European Communities for the
annulment of Commission Decision BUDG/C3/EB/WH
D(2003) 10.5 — 191 No 331997 of 24 October 2003 on
‘setting off the Commission’s claims against its debts’, included
in the table annexed which sets out the ‘set off prescribed on
7 November 2003’, with reference to amounts relating to the
European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) applicable to
the ‘Porto Empedocle major project’, ‘Diga Gibbesi’, ‘Messina-
Palermo motorway major project’, ‘Aragona Favara’ and ‘Piana
di Catania’, and all other acts resulting from it.

In support of its action the Regione Siciliana alleges:

Action brought on 24 December 2003 by the Regione
Siciliana against the Commission of the European Com-
munities

1.

(Case T-435/03)

(2004/C 47/73)

(Language of the case: Italian)

Infringement and/or erroneous application of Articles 71
and 73 of Council Regulation No 1605 of 25 June
2002 (1) and Articles 83 and 86 of Commission
implementing Regulation No 2342 of 23 December
2002 (2) in so far as the contested decision has set off
against the credits of the Regione Siciliana certain debts
in the form of interest for late payment alleged to have
accrued to the Regione during periods in which, had the
Commission applied the Community rules according to
the law and timeously, no such interest would have
become due;

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 24 December 2003 by the Regione
Siciliana, represented by A. Cingolo, avvocato dello Stato.

2.

Infringement and erroneous application of Articles 73
and 187 of Council Regulation No 1605 of 25 June 2002
and Article 83 of Commission implementing Regulation
No 2342 of 23 December 2002 as regards the starting
date for the application of the compulsory set off of
credits and debits to the Commission;

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— Annul Commission Decision BUDG/C3/EB/WH D(2003)
10.5 — 191 No 331997 of 24 October 2003 on ‘setting
off the Commission’s claims against its debts’, included in
the table annexed which sets out the ‘set off prescribed
on 7 November 2003’, with reference to amounts relating
to the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF)
applicable to the ‘Porto Empedocle major project’, ‘Diga

3. Misuse of powers on grounds of contradiction between
subsequent acts and infringement of the principle of
legitimate expectations in so far as the Commission
contradicted its own earlier decisions even against the
Regione Siciliana as regards the lawfulness of using a set
off to extinguish financial obligations similar to those in
the present case;