Case T-89/04: Actionbrought on 24 February 2004 by C.I. Bieger againstEuropol
Date: 2004-04-30
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: Europol, action for annulment (EU), work contract

30.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 106/79

— order the European Parliament to pay the costs.

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

shared between the applicant and her

By the contested act the Parliament decided to take into consid-
eration,
for the purpose of calculating the tax abatement
provided for by Article 3 of Regulation 260/68 (1) and the
expatriation allowance payable to the applicant, two only of
her children, on the ground that actual maintenance of the chil-
dren was
former
husband, who is also an official and entitled to the same allow-
ances. The applicant challenges this decision, claiming that she
alone actually maintains the children, given that the monthly
contribution paid by her former husband for each child is less
than the threshold laid down by the conclusions of the Group
of the Heads of Administration and is not, in any case, of such
an amount that the children can be regarded as being depen-
dent on their father, given the latter's grade and his posting
outside the Communities.

In support of her application, the applicant alleges infringement
of Articles 7, 14, 25(2), 29(1)(a) and 45 of the Staff Regulations
and infringement of the rules on the appointment of officials at
grade A1 and A2, misuse of powers and failure to observe
general principles of law, such as the principle of legality, prin-
ciple that officials should have reasonable career prospects,
equal
requiring the
appointing authority to adopt decisions only on the basis of
legally permissible grounds, that is to say grounds which are
relevant and free from manifest errors of assessment.

treatment and,

the principles

finally,

(1) Regulation (EEC, Euratom, ECSC) of the Council of 29 February
1968 laying down the conditions and procedure for applying the
tax for the benefit of
the European Communities (OJ, English
Special Edition 1968 II, p. 37).

Action brought on 24 February 2004 by C.I. Bieger against
Europol

Action brought on 3 March 2004 by Marie Tzirani against
Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-88/04)

(2004/C 106/154)

(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 3 March 2004 by Marie Tzirani,
represented by Eric Boigelot, lawyer.

(Case T-89/04)

(2004/C 106/155)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

An action against Europol was brought before the Court of
First Instance of the European Communities on 24 February
2004 by C.I. Bieger, residing in Zoetermeer (Netherlands),
represented by P. de Casparis and M.F. Baltussen.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

1) set aside the dismissal of 24 November 2003 by Europol of
the appeal brought by C.I. Bieger against the decision of
6 June 2003, and at the same time annul the decision of
6 June 2003;

2) order Europol to extend C.I. Bieger's contract of employ-

ment to 1 July 2006;

The applicant claims that the Court should:

3) Order Europol to pay the costs of the proceedings.

— annul the decision of the Commission of 23 May 2003 to
reject the applicant's candidature for the post of A2 as
Director of ADMIN.C ‘Social policy, Luxembourg staff,
health and safety’;

— annul the appointment of another official to that post;

— in so far as necessary, annul the implied rejection of the
applicant's complaint, which was lodged on 7 August 2003
and registered under number R/461/03;

Pleas in law and main arguments:

In support of her application,the applicant pleads infringement
of the principle that reasons must be given and argues that
Europol exceeded its discretionary power.