Case T-171/04: Action brought on 17 May 2004 by Daniel Surget against the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2004-07-24
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: Council of the European Union, European Commission, action for annulment (EU), broker, customs regulations, maritime transport

24.7.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 190/19

Action brought on 17 May 2004 by Daniel Surget against
the Council of the European Union and the Commission
of the European Communities

(Case T-171/04)

(2004/C 190/31)

(Language of the case: French)

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 17
May 2004 by Daniel Surget, residing in Cherbourg (France),
represented by Jean-François Péricaud, lawyer.

Action brought on 17 May 2004 by Nathalie Heinen
against Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-181/04)

(2004/C 190/32)

(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 17 May 2004 by Nathalie Heinen,
residing in Ottignies
represented by Sébastien
Orlandi, Albert Coolen, Jean-Noël Louis and Etienne Marchal,
lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

(Belgium),

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the decision of the selection board in Competition
COM/PB/02 not to include the applicant's name on the
reserve list;

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

— order the Council and the Commission jointly and severally
to pay the sum of EUR 909 428, or in the alternative
EUR 740 190, with interest in either case at the legal rate
from the date this action was brought, by way of damages;

— order the Council and the Commission to bear the costs

jointly and severally.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

The pleas in law and principal arguments are the same as those
relied on in Case T-440/03 Arizmendi and Others v Council
and Commission (1).

(1) OJ C 59, 6. 3. 2004, p. 31.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

The applicant, who took the tests in internal competition
COM/PB/02 to move from Category C to Category B, contests
the decision of the selection board not to place her on the
reserve list drawn up following that competition on the basis
of the marks she was awarded in the oral test which, although
higher than those required in theory, were insufficient.

In support of her claims the applicant pleads breach of the
notice of competition and breach of the principle of equality of
treatment and non-discrimination.

In that connection the applicant explains that although the
notice of competition provided that the candidates had to indi-
cate on their application form their chosen language for the
pre-selection tests and for the oral test, with the option of
choosing a different language for the oral test, that decision
being final, certain candidates were allowed to change language
after submitting their application form, some of them on the
day of the oral test itself.