Case T-395/03: Action brought on 10 December 2003 by Sophie van Weyenbergh against the Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2004-03-06
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment (EU), assistant, competition (EU)

C 59/22

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

6.3.2004

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

Action brought on 2 December 2003 by Yedas Tarim ve
Otomotiv Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. against the Council of
the European Union and the Commission of the European
Communities

(Case T-367/03)

(2004/C 59/36)

(Language of the case: English)

An action against the Council of the European Union and the
Commission of
the European Communities was brought
before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities
on 2 December 2003 by Yedas Tarim ve Otomotiv Sanayi ve
(Turkey), represented by R. Sinner,
Ticaret A.S.,
lawyer, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

Istanbul,

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— grant compensation to the applicant for the loss incurred
due to the Customs Union procedures generally, which
arose from the Ankara Agreement, the Additional Proto-
col and its appendices, and especially the Common
Council Decision No 1/95 of the European Community.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant is a small and medium sized enterprise, active in
the automotive industry. The applicant claims to have suffered
a loss caused by the customs union between the European
Union and Turkey (1), established in 1996. According to the
applicant, the European Union has not fulfilled all of its
obligations arising from the customs union and the Ankara
Agreement (2).

The applicant claims that Turkey would be given loans and
donations from the Community’s program for Mediterranean
countries and from the European Union’s budget resources in
order to eliminate the negative effects of the customs union
on Turkey’s economy. According to the applicant, the assist-
ance given was inadequate. The applicant, as a small and
medium company, claims to have suffered losses due to the

lack of sufficient financial aid and therefore a disadvantage in
terms of fair competition with other companies in the field.

(1) Decision No 1/95 of the EC-Turkey Association Council of
22 December 1995 on implementing the final phase of the
Customs Union (OJ L 35 of 13 February 1996, p. 1).

(2) Agreement establishing an Association between the European
Economic Community and Turkey (OJ P 217 of 29 December
1964, p. 3687) (No English text available).

Action brought on 10 December 2003 by Sophie van
Weyenbergh against the Commission of the European
Communities

(Case T-395/03)

(2004/C 59/37)

(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 10 December 2003 by Sophie van
Weyenbergh, resident in Tervuren (Belgium), represented by
Carlos Mourato, lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the decision of the selection board of Competition
COM/TB/99 not to include the applicant in the list of
suitable candidates;

— order the defendant to pay to the applicant the sum of
EUR 72 924,00, subject to modification in the course of
the proceedings, in respect of damages for material and
non-material loss;

— order the defendant to pay the costs of the case.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Following the judgment of the Court of First Instance of
13 March 2002 in Joined Cases T-357/00, T-361/00, T-363/
00 and T-364/00 (1) annulling the decision of the selection
board to reject the applicant’s candidature for internal Compe-
tition COM/TB/99 for the constitution of a reserve list of
administrative assistants in career bracket B4/B5, the applicant
was called to a new oral test. She objects to the failure to
include her name on the list of suitable candidates in this
competition.

6.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 59/23

In this regard, she points out that the letter by which she was
notified of the contested decision bears the date of 20 January
2003, that is to say three days before the date on which the
oral test in question actually took place. That error was later
corrected.

In support of her claims, the applicant pleads:

— breach of the notice of the competition in question and a
defect in the procedure, in that the selection board could
not evaluate her on her oral abilities until
it had
interviewed her;

— misuse of powers given that the selection board was

biased;

— breach of the principle of equal treatment; and

— breach of the requirement to state grounds for a decision.

(1) [2002] ECR-SC I-A-37, II-161.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant was an official of the European Parliament when
he was transferred to OHIM on 1st October 1998. By the
contested decision, OHIM informed the applicant of his
number of merit points for the 2002 promotion year. When
calculating those points, OHIM limited the applicant’s length
of service in the grade to five years and as a result did not take
account of the period from 1 January 1991 to 31 October
1993.

In support of his claim for annulment, the applicant submits,
firstly, that there was a breach of Article 1 of Decision ADM
02-39 rev of OHIM concerning the career and promotion of
officials and temporary staff, and of the principles of legality,
legal certainty and equal treatment. He submits, furthermore,
that that there was a breach of the Staff Regulations in so far
as the principles applicable to transfers between institutions
were not adhered to and that
the applicant’s legitimate
expectations when he accepted the transfer were not upheld.
The applicant submits, finally, that there was a breach of the
requirement to state the reasons for the disputed decision and
of the principle of proportionality.

Action brought on 11 December 2003 by Manuel Simões
dos Santos against the Office for Harmonisation in the
Internal Market

Action brought on 18 December 2003 by Hoechst AG
against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-409/03)

(2004/C 59/38)

(Language of the case: French)

(Case T-410/03)

(2004/C 59/39)

(Language of the case: German)

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (OHIM) was brought before the Court of First Instance
of the European Communities on 11 December 2003 by
Manuel Simões dos Santos, resident
in Alicante (Spain),
represented by Antonio Creus Carreras, lawyer.

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of Justice of the European
Communities on 18 December 2003 by Hoechst AG, Frankfurt
am Main (Germany), represented by M. Klusmann and V. Turn-
er, lawyers.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the implied decision of the Appointing Authority
rejecting the complaint made by the applicant and the
decision of 14 February 2003 fixing his initial number of
merit points for the 2002 promotion year in so far as it
limits his period of service in the European Parliament;

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the contested decision in so far as it concerns the

applicant;

— in the alternative, make an appropriate reduction in the
amount of the fine imposed on the applicant in the
contested decision;

— order the defendant to pay all the costs of the case.

— order the defendant to pay the costs.