Case T-95/05: Action brought on 14 February 2005 by Jean Dehon against European Parliament
Date: 2005-04-30
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Parliament, European official, action by staff, action for annulment (EU), appointment of staff, personnel administration, regulations for civil servants

C 106/40

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.4.2005

Action brought on 21 February 2005 by GAEC SALAT
against the Commission of the European Communities

European Communities on 18 February 2005 by Athinaiki
Techniki SA, Neo Iraklio, Athens (Greece), represented by
Spyros A. Pappas, lawyer.

(Case T-89/05)

(2005/C 106/79)

(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 21 February 2005 by GAEC
SALAT, with its registered office in Cussac (France), represented
by F. Delpeuch, lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

1. annul the decision of the Directorate General for Competi-
tion to take no further action on the applicant's complaint
relating to State aid granted by the Hellenic Republic to the
Hyatt Regency consortium in connection with the Casino
Mont Parnes public contract, which the applicant learnt of
by letter dated 2 December 2004;

2. order the Commission to pay the costs.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Pleas in law and main arguments

1. Hold that the refusal of the European Commission to rule
on the complaint lodged by GAEC SALAT on 15 October
2004 and registered on 26 October 2004 under No
0411325 was unlawful.

2. draw the legal consequences following therefrom.

In support of its application the applicant relies first on an
alleged infringement by the Commission of the obligation to
initiate the formal examination procedure provided for by
Article 88(2) EC and Article 4(4) of Regulation (EC) No
659/1999.

Pleas in law and main arguments

the applicant

In this case,
lodged a complaint with the
Commission concerning the amendment of the specification of
the designation of origin ‘SALERS’ by Commission Regulation
(EC) No 828/2003 of 14 May 2003 amending the specification
of 16 names appearing in the Annex to Regulation (EC) No
1107/96 on the registration of geographical
indications and
designations of origin under the procedure laid down in Article
17 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92. That designation
of origin had already been registered as such by virtue of Regu-
lation (EC) No 1107/96.

The applicant argues that such amendment of the specification
constitutes an infringement of general legal principles, and in
particular of the principle of equal treatment and non-discrimi-
nation in relation to the designations of origin Salers cheese
and Laguiole cheese.

Second, the applicant complains that the Commission made
several errors in the statement of reasons for the contested
In this connection, the applicant submits that the
decision.
Commission states no reasoning to demonstrate that
there
were no serious difficulties of assessment, still less to explain
why it disregarded certain key documents. Moreover,
the
contested decision is based solely on the analysis of the Direc-
torate General
for the Internal Market, although this was
confined to finding that it was not possible to apply the Com-
munity legislation in this case. Finally, the applicant considers
that the statement of reasons for the decision, namely the deci-
sion not to regard the measures concerned as State aid, is also
inadequate, and submits, on the same basis, that there was an
infringement of Article 87(1) EC.

Action brought on 18 February 2005 by Athinaiki Tech-
niki SA against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities

(Case T-94/05)

(2005/C 106/80)

(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

Action brought on 14 February 2005 by Jean Dehon
against European Parliament

(Case T-95/05)

(2005/C 106/81)

(Language of the case: French)

An action against the European Parliament was brought before
the Court of First
Instance on 14 February 2005 by Jean
Dehon, residing at Hagen (Luxembourg), represented by Sébas-
tien Orlandi, Xavier Martin M., Albert Coolen, Jean-Noël Louis
and Etienne Marchal,
lawyers, with an address for service in
Luxembourg.

30.4.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 106/41

The applicant claims that the Court of First Instance should:

Action brought on 21 February 2005 by the Compagnie
d'entreprises C.F.E. against the Commission of the Euro-
pean Communities

— annul the decision of the European Parliament of 29 April
2004 appointing another person as deputy head of the
French translation division;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

(Case T-100/05)

(2005/C 106/82)

(Language of the Case: French)

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant takes exception to the appointing authority's
refusal to uphold his application for the post of deputy head of
the French translation division. The candidate chosen was
appointed following the publication of internal competition
notice LA/113 (vacancy notice No 9192).

In support of his claims, he alleges infringement of Article 233
of the EC treaty,
infringement of Article 29(1) of the Staff
Regulations, breach of the principle of the right to career devel-
opment and failure to fulfil the obligation to state reasons.

Specifically, he contends that:

An action was brought on 21 February 2005 against
the
Commission of the European Communities by the Compagnie
d'entreprises C.F.E., whose registered office is in Brussels, repre-
sented by Bernard Louveaux and Joël van Ypersele, avocats.

The applicant claims that the Court of First Instance should:

— annul Commission Decision of 7 December 2004 adopting,
pursuant to Council Directive 92/43/EEC, the list of sites of
Community importance for the Atlantic biogeographical
region (2004/813/EC) published in the Official Journal of the
European Communities of 29 December 2004, in its entirety
or at least to the extent to which it classified as a site of
Community importance the applicant's property situate at
Avenue de la Foresterie, Watermael-Boitsfort (Belgium) and
registered in the land register under section F No 66/Y/2
and 66/S/2;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

— the contested appointment was made without any examina-

tion of the applicant's application;

Pleas and main arguments

— the order of priority for the various procedures for filling
posts, as provided for in Article 29 of the Staff Regulations,
was not observed;

— the absence of a decision regarding the applicant's applica-
tion under the procedure for promotion/transfer is particu-
larly serious since the procedure for filling the post in ques-
tion had already been the subject of an annulling judgment
in Case T-261/99 Dehon v Parliament. Compliance with that
judgment involved restoring the situation to the position as
it stood before the circumstances criticised by the Court
came into being.

The applicant in the present case is the owner of a major share
of building land situate in the region of Brussels-Capital. That
land has been classified by the contested decision as a site of
Community importance.

In support of its claims the applicant pleads:

— Infringement of Article 4(1) and (2) of Annex III to Council
Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation
of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, inasmuch as
the Commission took the decision at issue even though no
draft list of sites of Community importance had been duly
proposed by Belgium; the author of the proposal in that
regard, the Brussels Institute for the management of the
environment is manifestly not competent to formulate such
proposal. Consequently, the contested decision is vitiated by
lack of competence.