Case T-127/07 P: Order of the Court of First Instance of 10 June 2008 — Bligny v Commission (Appeal — Staff case — Open competition — Conditions governing admission — Not admitted at the stage of correction of the written test — Competition notice — Incomplete application — Proof of citizenship — Appeal manifestly unfounded)
Date: 2008-06-10
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, European citizenship, action for annulment (EU), appeal, competition (EU), official document

C 197/24

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

2.8.2008

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed.

2. The applicants shall pay the costs, including those relating to the

application for interim measures.

(1) OJ C 249, 14.10.2006.

4. There is no longer any need to give a decision on the application

for annulment in Case T-383/06.

5. The application for damages in Case T-383/06 is dismissed as

manifestly lacking any foundation in law.

6. In Case T-383/06, the Parliament shall bear its own costs and
pay half of the costs of Icuna.Com SCRL, including those relating
to the proceedings for interim relief. Icuna.Com shall bear half of
its own costs.

7. In Case T-71/07, Icuna.Com shall bear its own costs and pay
those incurred by the Parliament, including those relating to the
proceedings for interim relief and to the objection of inadmissibility.

Order of the Court of First Instance of 14 May 2008 —
Icuna.Com v Parliament

(1) OJ C 20, 27.1.2007.

(Joined Cases T-383/06 and T-71/07) (1)

(Actions for annulment — Actions for damages — Public
service contracts — Community tendering procedure — Rejec-
tion of a tender — Decision to annul the tendering procedure
— Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law — No
need to give a decision)

(2008/C 197/42)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Icuna.Com SCRL (Braine-le-Château, Belgium) (repre-
sented by: J. Windey and P. De Bandt, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament
Rousseau and M. Ecker, Agents)

(represented by: O. Caissou-

Re:

In Case T-383/06, (i) an application for annulment of the deci-
sion of the European Parliament of 1 December 2006 rejecting
the tender submitted by the applicant in the framework of lot 2
(programme contents) of
the tender procedure EP/DGINFO/
WEBTV/2006/0003 relating to the creation and establishment
of the European Parliament web television channel and (ii) an
application for damages to compensate for the loss allegedly
suffered by the applicant following the adoption of the decision
of 1 December 2006 and, in Case T-71/07, (i) an application
for annulment of the decision of the European Parliament of
31 January 2007 annulling the tender procedure EP/DGINFO/
WEBTV/2006/0003 relating to the creation and establishment
of the European Parliament web television channel, in so far as
concerns lot 2 (programme contents), and (ii) an application for
damages to compensate for the loss allegedly suffered by the
applicant following the adoption of the decision of 31 January
2007.

Operative part of the order

1. Cases T-383/06 and T-71/07 shall be joined for the purposes of

the order.

Order of the Court of First Instance of 10 June 2008 —
Bligny v Commission

(Case T-127/07 P) (1)

(Appeal — Staff case — Open competition — Conditions
governing admission — Not admitted at the stage of correc-
tion of the written test — Competition notice — Incomplete
application — Proof of citizenship — Appeal manifestly
unfounded)

(2008/C 197/43)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Francesco Bligny (Tassin-la-Demi-Lune, France) (repre-
sented by: P. Lebel-Nourissat, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of
Communities (represented by:
Agents)

the European
J. Currall and K. Herrmann,

Re:

Appeal against the order of the European Union Civil Service
Tribunal
(Second Chamber) of 15 February 2007 in Joined
Cases F-142/06 and F-142/06 AJ Bligny v Commission, not yet
published in the ECR, seeking to have that order set aside.

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Francesco Bligny shall bear his own costs and those incurred by the

Commission.

2. In Case T-71/07, the objection of inadmissibility shall be consid-

ered together with the substance of the case.

(1) OJ C 140, 23.6.2007.

3. The action in Case T-71/07 is dismissed as manifestly lacking any

foundation in law.