Case T-32/05: Action brought on 19 January 2005 by Claire Staelen against European Parliament
Date: 2005-05-14
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Parliament, action for annulment (EU), competition (EU), indemnification

C 115/22

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

14.5.2005

omitted to take a decision on the authorisations requested by
the Spanish authorities concerning the establishment of joint
enterprises,
in accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No
2792/1999 of 17 December 1999 laying down the detailed
rules and arrangements regarding Community structural assis-
tance in the fisheries sector (OJ 1999 L 337, p. 10), as
amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 2369/2002 of 20
December 2002 (OJ 2002 L 358, p. 49) — the Court of First
Instance (Third Chamber), composed of M. Jaeger, President, J.
Azizi and E. Cremona,
Jung, Registrar, made an
Judges; H.
order on 10 January 2005, the operative part of which is as
follows:

1. The action is dismissed so far as concerns the requests relating to

the vessels Balcagia and Enterprace;

2. There is no further need to adjudicate on the remainder of the

action;

3. The applicant shall bear the costs.

(1) OJ C 201 of 7.8.2004.

concerning the marks awarded in the oral test and his exclu-
sion from the list of successful candidates in the competition
of 22 April 2004;

2. order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant in these proceedings contests the decision of the
selection board in Competition COM/B/2/02, excluding him, as
a result of the marks awarded in his oral test, from the list of
candidates finally selected.

the selection board had confined itself

In that respect, the applicant requested the chairman of the
selection board to review his oral test; the chairman replied
that
in his case to
applying the assessment criteria (‘grille d'évaluation’) used for
all the candidates and that the manner in which the selection
board had applied the classification procedure was protected by
the requirement of confidentiality.

In support of his claims, the applicant alleges infringement of
the principle of transparency and disregard of what constitutes
a ‘document’, for Community purposes, basing its decision to
exclude the applicant on an existing document
(la grille
the contents of which are not specified and
d'évaluation),
which remain confidential.

Action brought on 30 December 2004 by Arturo Ruiz
Bravo-Villasante against the Commission of the European
Communities

(Case T-507/04)

(2005/C 115/42)

(Language of the case: Spanish)

Action brought on 19 January 2005 by Claire Staelen
against European Parliament

(Case T-32/05)

(2005/C 115/43)

(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 30 December 2004 by Arturo Ruiz
Bravo-Villasante, residing in Madrid, represented by Jose Luis
Fuertes Suárez, lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court of First Instance should:

1. annul the decision of the appointing authority, namely the
Director of the European Personnel Selection Office, of 23
August 2004, dealing with the complaint against the deci-
sion of the selection board in Competition COM/B/2/02,

An action against the European Parliament was brought before
the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
19 January 2005 by Claire Staelen, residing in Bridel (Luxem-
bourg), represented by Joëlle Choucroun,
lawyer, having an
address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

1. annul the decision of the selection board of 18 August

2004 in Competition EUR/A/151/98;

14.5.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 115/23

2. order the European Parliament to pay to the applicant the
sum of EUR 30 000 in respect of compensation for the
non-material damage which she claims to have suffered,
increased by the statutory interest in force in the Grand
Duchy of Luxembourg from the date of the judgment to be
delivered until
the substantive
full and final settlement,
damage being reserved;

3. order the European Parliament
incurred in the proceedings.

to pay all of

the costs

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant had brought an action against the decision of the
selection board in Competition EUR/151/98. By judgment
delivered by the Court of First Instance on 5 March 2003 in
Case T-24/01, that decision was set aside. Following that annul-
ment, the Parliament reopened the competition and the selec-
tion board resumed its deliberations. By the decision contested
in the present case, the selection board for the competition
decided not to place the applicant on the list of successful
candidates.

In support of her action, the applicant alleges a breach of
Article 233 EC, maintenance of discriminatory treatment and
infringement of the principle of the protection of legitimate
expectations.

Action brought on 4 February 2005 by SP Entertainment
Development GmbH against the Commission of the Euro-
pean Communities

(Case T-44/05)

(2005/C 115/44)

(Language of the case: German)

An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 4 February 2005 by SP Entertain-
ment Development GmbH, Norderfriedrichskoog (Germany),
represented by C. Demleitner, lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— order the Commission to pay the necessary costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In the
contested decision the Commission called upon
Germany to reclaim a loan which was granted to a predecessor
company of the applicant by an associated company of the
City of Bremen. The applicant claims that this decision was
based on the unfounded assumption of the Commission that
the loan in question had not yet been repaid. According to the
applicant, repayment had already been made by means of
transfer of a stake in the company to which the loan was
granted to the company which granted the loan. This repay-
ment by means of ‘payment instead of performance’ does not
constitute State aid for the purposes of Article 87(1) EC that is
contrary to Community law since the value of the assigned
stake amounts at least to the sum of the loan. Additionally,
interest was paid up to 31 December 2003. From this date the
applicant did not have to pay any interest since the transfer of
the stake was delayed due to reasons for which the applicant
was not responsible.

Action brought on 17 February 2005 by Deutsche
Telekom AG against the Office for Harmonisation in the
Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

(Case T-72/05)

(2005/C 115/45)

(Language of the Case: German)

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the
Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 17
February 2005 by Deutsche Telekom AG, Bonn, Germany,
represented by J.-C. Gaedertz and D.R. Marschollek, lawyers.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— set aside the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market of 15
December 2004;

— annul Commission Decision D/57536 of 20 October 2004;

— order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.