Case T-442/04: Action brought on 5 November 2004 by Andrea Walderdorff against the Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2005-01-08
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, European official, action by staff, equal treatment, personnel administration, promotion, regulations for civil servants, staff assessment

8.1.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 6/45

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Pleas in law and main arguments

— annul the decision of the Council refusing to grant to the
applicant the expatriation allowance and resulting rights,
from her entry into service on 1 September 2003;

— order the Council to pay the costs.

The applicant in this case, an official in Grade A4, objects to
the Appointing Authority's refusal
to promote him to the
higher grade in the second round of the 2003 promotion
procedure.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Before entering into the Council's service, the applicant worked
in the information office of the Land Baden-Würtemberg in
In the present action she challenges the decision
Brussels.
refusing to grant her the expatriation allowance.

In support of her action, the applicant pleads breach of Article
4(1)(a) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations in that the Council
did not consider that she was in circumstances arising from
work done for another State. The applicant also pleads breach
of the principle of equal treatment and of non-discrimination.

Action brought on 2 November 2004 by Jean-Claude
Heyraud against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities

(Case T-441/04)

(2005/C 6/88)

(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 2 November 2004, by Jean-Claude
Heyraud, residing in Brussels, represented by S. Orlandi, A.
Cooolen, J.-N. Louis and E. Marchal, lawyers, with an address
for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

In support of his claims, he pleads infringement of Article 45
of the Staff Regulations and breach of the principle of non-
discrimination.

He states, in that regard, that the Commission ‘standardised’ the
merit points awarded by the Directorates-General and Services
to officials in middle management in Grade A4 eligible for
promotion, for the purposes of considering their comparative
merits as prescribed by the Staff Regulations. The standardised
mark is fixed in relation to the average merit points awarded to
the officials in Grade A4 eligible for promotion to Grade A3 in
the second round.

The method used by the Commission is relevant only provided
that
the average is calculated on the basis of a sufficient
number of eligible officials. Since he was the only official in
Grade A4 in his Service eligible for promotion in the second
round of the 2003 procedure, the applicant was awarded a
standardised mark of 100 regardless of his merits and the
specific criteria used by his Service to fix merit points.

Action brought on 5 November 2004 by Andrea Walder-
dorff against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities

(Case T-442/04)

(2005/C 6/89)

(Language of the case: French)

— Annul the Commission's decision establishing the list of
officials promoted to Grade A3 in the second round of the
2003 promotion procedure, and rejecting the applicant's
candidature;

— Order the Commission to pay the costs.

An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 5 November 2004, by Andrea
Walderdorff, residing in Brussels, represented by L. Vogel,
lawyer.

C 6/46

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

8.1.2005

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Pleas in law and main arguments

— Annul the Appointing Authority's decision adopted on 19
July 2004 rejecting the applicant's complaint dated 26
February 2004, by which she challenged the decision
refusing to promote her from Grade A5 to Grade A4, for
the 2003 promotion procedure;

The applicant submitted a tender for a service contract for a
monitoring system of
the implementation of projects and
programmes of external co-operation financed by the European
Community — lot no. 2 covering ACP, South Africa and Cuba,
which was published the 26 May 2004 (1).

— If, and in so far as necessary, annul also the Appointing
Authority's original decision in November 2003 refusing to
promote the applicant from Grade A5 to Grade A4, for the
2003 promotion procedure;

— Order the Defendant to pay the costs.

The Commission rejected the tender by decision of 18
November 2004 on the grounds that there was a discrepancy
between the applicants financial offer and technical offer as to
the number of man/days required. The Commission upheld its
decision by letter of 30 November 2004.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as those in
Case T-432/04.

The applicant submits that the Commission's decision is based
on an error of fact since, according to the applicant, there was
no such discrepancy between the two parts of the companies
tender.

The applicant further alleges that the Commission ought to
have sought to clarify the alleged disrepancy and that in not
having done so before rejecting the applicants tender the
Commission has taken a disproportionate action and failed to
exercise due diligence, whereby it infringed its duty of care.

Action brought on 2 December 2004 by Danish Manage-
the European
ment A/S against

the Commission of

(1) OJ S 102-081573.

Communities

(Case T-463/04)

(2005/C 6/90)

(Language of the case: English)

An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 2 December 2004 by Danish
Management A/S, Viby J, Denmark, represented by C. Kennedy-
Loest and C. Thomas, Solicitors.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the Commission's decisions of 18 November 2004
and 30 November 2004 rejecting the tender submitted by
the applicant in tender procedure service contract for a
monitoring system of the implementation of projects and
programmes of external co-operation financed by the Euro-
pean Community — lot 2: ACP, South Africa and Cuba —
EuropeAid 119453/C/SV/Multi;

Action brought on 3 December 2004 by Impala against
the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-464/04)

(2005/C 6/91)

(Language of the case: English)

An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 3 December 2004 by Impala, Brus-
sels (Belgium), represented by S. Crosby and J.Golding, Solici-
tors.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— order the defendant to pay the applicant's costs.

— Annul the Commission's decision of 19 July 2004 in case

no. COMP/M.3333 — Sony/BMG in its entirety;