Action brought on 6 February 2004 by Emmanuel Micha against the Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2004-04-17
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, European official, action for annulment (EU), professional career, promotion, staff assessment

C 94/52

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

17.4.2004

In support of its application, the applicant submits that when
finding that the commitments would be sufficient to prevent
Toll Collect's on-board-unit from becoming the dominant plat-
form for the provision of telematics services, the Commission
committed a manifest error of appraisal, wrongly established
the facts, and contradicted its own competitive assessment.
According to the applicant, the commitments fail to remedy
the competition concerns
identified by the Commission,
namely that Toll Collect's on-board-unit, which allows the
provision of all core telematics services,
is provided free of
charge and that truck operators will not pay for alternative
systems if they can obtain telematics services through Toll
Collect's on-board-unit. The applicant furthermore claims that
the contested decision is not supported by sufficient reasoning.

(1) 2003/792/EC: Commission Decision of 30 April 2003
declaring a concentration to be compatible with the
common market and the EEA Agreement
(Case COMP/
M.2903 - DaimlerChrysler/Deutsche Telekom/JV) (Text with
EEA relevance.) (notified under document number C(2003)
1409) (OJ L 300, p. 62)

Action brought on 12 February 2004 by Faraj Hassan
the European Union and the
against

the Council of
Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-49/04)

(2004/C 94/140)

(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 12
February 2004 by Faraj Hassan, London, United Kingdom,
represented by Mr E.Grieves, Barrister and Mr H. Miller Soli-
citor.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul Council Regulation (EC) No. 881/2002 of 27 May
2002, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No.
2049/2003 20 November 2003 and/or Commission Regu-
lation (EC) No. 2049/2003 in its entirety and/or in respect
of the proscription of the applicant;

— alternatively, declare the aforementioned Regulations inap-
plicable in respect of their applications to the applicant;
and

— Order the Council to pay the costs incurred by the appli-

cant in the present proceedings;

Commission to amend or supplement Annex I on the basis of
determinations made by either the United Nations Security
Council or the Sanctions Committee. In November 2003 the
Sanctions Committee of the United Nations Security Council
listed the applicant as a person to whom freezing of funds and
should apply. By Regulation 2049/2003 (2) Official
assets
Journal L 303, 21/11/2003 P. 0020 - 0021 the Commission
amended Annex I to Regulation 881/2002, adding the appli-
cant's name to it.

The applicant contests these measures invoking breaches of his
fundamental human rights. He submits that the effect of the
contested measures is to annihilate his peaceful enjoyment of
his property and his private and family life, contrary to Article
8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and of Article
1 of Protocol 1 to the same Convention. The applicant further
submits that the defendants wholly failed to provide him, both
before and after the decision was taken, with a fair hearing or
effective remedy to counter any assertions of fact relied upon.
According to the applicant this constitutes a violation of Arti-
cles 6 and 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Finally, the applicant claims that the contested measures violate
the principle of proportionality.

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 of 27 May 2002
imposing certain specific
restrictive measures directed
against certain persons and entities associated with Usama
bin Laden,
the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban, and
repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 467/2001 prohibiting
the export of certain goods and services to Afghanistan,
strengthening the flight ban and extending the freezing of
funds and other financial resources in respect of the Taliban
of Afghanistan, Official
Journal L 139 , 29/05/2002 P.
0009 - 0022

(2) Commission Regulation (EC) No 2049/2003 of 20
November 2003 amending for the 25th time Council Regu-
lation (EC) No 881/2002 imposing certain specific restric-
tive measures directed against certain persons and entities
associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network
and the Taliban, and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No
467/2001

Action brought on 6 February 2004 by Emmanuel Micha
against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-50/04)

(2004/C 94/141)

— Order the Council to pay damages

(Language of the case: French)

Pleas in law and main arguments:

Regulation 881/2002 (1)1 makes provision for the freezing of
funds and economic resources of persons listed in its Annex I.
the
that
Article 7 paragraph 1 of

regulation authorises

An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 6 February 2004 by Emmanuel
Micha, resident
in Roeser (Luxembourg), represented by S.
Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis and E. Marchal, lawyers, with an
address for service in Luxembourg.

17.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 94/53

The applicant claims that the Court should:

In support of his claims he relies on pleas of:

— annul the decision of 4 April 2003 in which the Commis-
sion draws up a definitive staff report for the applicant for
the period from 1 July 1999 to 30 June 2001;

— breach of the obligation to state grounds;

— a manifest error of assessment;

— order the defendant to pay the applicant the amount of
EUR 1, as symbolic compensation for damage suffered as
the result of the delay in drawing up his staff report and
the detriment to his reasonable career prospects;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

The applicant in this case challenges the measure by which the
Commission drew up his staff report for the period 1999-
2001.

In support of his claims, he alleges:

— The existence of a manifest error of assessment and of
inconsistency between the general and analytical assess-
ments in that the assessor did not taken into account the
reference framework specific to the applicant's grade. Speci-
fically, the duties which he performed fall within a grade
higher than his actual grade;

— Infringement of the obligation to state reasons;

— Infringement of the obligation to draw up an annual report
within a reasonable period, to the detriment of the appli-
cant's reasonable career prospects.

Action brought on 9 February 2004 by Carlos Leite
Mateus against Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-51/04)

(2004/C 94/142)

(Language of the case: French)

An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 9 February 2004 by Carlos Leite
Mateus, residing in Zaventem (Belgium), represented by Sébas-
tien 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 decision of 14 March 2003 drawing up the
applicant's career development report for 2001-2002;

— Order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant disputes his career development report for the
period from 1 July 2001 to 31 December 2002.

— breach of the general provisions for implementing Article
43 of the Staff Regulations, in that, first, the decision of the
appeal assessor to downgrade the assessment of the appli-
cant's skills was erroneously based on tasks which were not
his responsibility and were not required by his post, and,
second, there were inconsistencies between the comments
and the marks awarded.

Action brought on 12 February 2004 by Luis Escobar
Guerrero against Commission of the European Commu-
nities

(Case T-52/04)

(2004/C 94/143)

(Language of the case: French)

An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 12 February 2004 by Luis Escobar
Guerrero, residing in Luxembourg, represented by Sébastien
Orlandi, Albert Coolen, Jean-Noël Louis and Etienne Marchal,
lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicants claim that the Court should:

— Annul the Commission's decision to promote the applicant
to Grade A5 for the promotion year 2002 in so far as the
date on which it takes effect is fixed at 1 May 2003;

— Order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Following the Commission's decision to promote him to Grade
A5, the applicant withdrew his action in Case T-92/03 against
the decision not to promote him during the 2002 promotion
procedure. In the present case, the applicant claims that the
Commission was required to promote him to Grade A5 with
effect from 1 April 2002 on the same terms as the other offi-
cials promoted to that grade in the 2002 promotion procedure.

In support of his action, the applicant claims that there has
been a breach of the principle of equal treatment and non-
discrimination, a breach of the principle that officials should
have reasonable career prospects and also failure to implement
in good faith the Commission's decision to deal favourably
with the complaint forming the subject-matter of Case T-92/
03.