CELEX: C2002/109/91
Language: en
Date: 2002-05-04 00:00:00
Title: Order of the Court of First Instance of 11 December 2001 in Case T-99/97: Willem Stols v Council of the European Union (Officials — Application for reclassification in grade — Objection of inadmissibility — Material new fact — Admissibility)

4.5.2002                EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                          C 109/45
P. Mengozzi, President, V. Tiili and R.M. Moura Ramos, Judges;            composed of M. Jaeger, President, K. Lenaerts and J. Azizi,
J. Plingers, Administrator, Registrar, has given a judgment on            Judges; J. Plingers, administrator, for the Registrar, gave a
7 February 2002, in which it:                                             judgment on 23 January 2002, in which it:
                                                                          1.   Annuls the decision of 18 July 2000 of the Secretary-General
1.    Annuls the Council’s decision of 5 June 2000 refusing the
                                                                               of the Parliament terminating the applicant’s secondment in the
      applicant access to certain reports drawn up by the Centre for
                                                                               interests of the service to the political group EDD and
      Information, Discussion and Exchange on Asylum, to certain
                                                                               reinstating him in the Directorate-General for Information and
      reports of joint missions or reports of missions undertaken by
                                                                               Public relations with effect from 15 July 2000;
      Member States sent to the Centre, and to information contained
      in the list of persons responsible in the Member States for
                                                                          2.   Orders the Parliament to pay the applicant a sum corresponding
      asylum applications to which access is permitted in certain
                                                                               to the difference between the remuneration which he should
      Member States, with the exception of those persons’ telephone
      and fax numbers;                                                         have received as an official on secondment in Grade A2, Step 1,
                                                                               and that which he received following his reinstatement in
                                                                               Grade LA5, Step 3, for the period 15 July 2000 to
2.    Orders the Council to pay the applicant’s costs and to bear its          30 November 2000, plus default interest at the rate of 5,25 %
      own costs.                                                               from the date on which the amounts making up the sum
                                                                               referred to in paragraph 149 were payable until the date of
                                                                               actual payment;
(1) OJ C 316 of 4.11.2000.
                                                                          3.   Declares the action for damages inadmissible in so far as the
                                                                               applicant seeks compensation for the harm caused by the
                                                                               conduct, not involving the taking of decisions, of the EDD
                                                                               group and certain of its members;
                                                                          4.   Orders the Parliament to pay the applicant the sum of 1 euro
                                                                               by way of symbolic damages for the non-pecuniary harm
                                                                               sustained as a result of the adoption of the contested decision;
    JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE                               5.   Orders the Parliament to pay all the costs of the main
                                                                               proceedings;
                        of 23 January 2002
                                                                          6.   Orders the parties to bear their own costs in the interlocutory
                                                                               proceedings.
in Case T-237/00 Patrick Reynolds v European Parlia-
                               ment (1)
                                                                          (1) OJ C 302, 21.10.2000.
(Officials — Secondment in the interests of the service —
Article 38 of the Staff Regulations Po — litical group —
Early termination of secondment — Rights of the defence —
         Non-contractual liability of the Community)
                         (2002/C 109/90)                                        ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
                    (Language of the case: French)                                             of 11 December 2001
                                                                          in Case T-99/97: Willem Stols v Council of the European
                                                                                                        Union (1)
In Case T-237/00: Patrick Reynolds, an official of the European
Parliament, residing in Brussels, represented by P. Legros                (Officials — Application for reclassification in grade —
and S. Rodrigues, lawyers, with an address for service in                 Objection of inadmissibility — Material new fact —
Luxembourg, against European Parliament (Agents: H. von                                              Admissibility)
Hertzen and D. Moore) — application for, first, annulment of
the decision of 18 July 2000 of the Secretary-General of the
Parliament terminating the applicant’s secondment in the                                           (2002/C 109/91)
interests of the service to the political group ‘Europe of
Democracies and Diversities’ and reinstating him in the                                      (Language of the case: French)
directorate-General for Information and public Relations and,
second, damages in respect of the harm sustained by the
applicant as a result of the adoption of that decision by the
defendant and of the acts of the political group and certain of           In Case T-99/97: Willem Stols, an official of the Council of the
its members — the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber),                European Union, residing at SE Halsteren (Netherlands),
 ---pagebreak--- C 109/46                EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                     4.5.2002
represented by N. Lhoëst, lawyer, with an address for service              No 01/2000 and that the defendant is not empowered
in Luxembourg, v Council of the European Union (Agents:                    unilaterally to introduce amendments to the terms and con-
T. Blanchet and G. Ramos Ruano) — application for annulment                ditions of employment or Staff Rules into the contracts
of the Council’s decision of 13 August 1996 rejecting the                  between the applicants and itself, nor to enforce such amend-
applicant’s request for a review of his classification in grade —          ments, — the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber),
the Court of First Instance (First Chamber), composed of:                  composed of M. Jaeger, President, K. Lenaerts and J. Azizi,
B. Vesterdorf, President; N.J. Forwood and H. Legal, Judges;               Judges; Registrar: H. Jung, made an order on 11 December
H. Jung, Registrar, made an order on 11 December 2001, the                 2001, the operative part of which is as follows:
operative part of which is as follows:
1.    The application is dismissed as inadmissible;                        1.   The application is dismissed as inadmissible.
2.    The parties are ordered to bear their own costs.
                                                                           2.   The parties shall bear their own costs.
(1) OJ C 181 of 14.6.97.
                                                                           (1) OJ 2001 C 108.
      ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
                      of 11 December 2001
in Case T-20/01 Maria Concetta Cerafogli and Others v
                    European Central Bank (1)                              Action brought on 18 December 2001 by Huntstown
                                                                           Air Park Limited and Omega Aviation Services Limited
                                                                             against the Commission of the European Communities
(Amendment of the Staff Rules of the European Central
      Bank — Action for annulment — Inadmissibility)
                                                                                                    (Case T-331/01)
                          (2002/C 109/92)
                                                                                                    (2002/C 109/93)
                   (Language of the case: German)
                                                                                             (Language of the case: English)
In Case T-20/01, Maria Concetta Cerafogli, residing in Frank-
furt (Federal Republic of Germany), Monika Esch-Leonhardt,
residing in Frankfurt, Marco Luigi Fassetta, residing in Wiesba-
den (Federal Republic of Germany), Tillmann Frommhold,
residing in Karben (Federal Republic of Germany), Johannes                 An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
Priesemann, residing in Frankfurt and Marc van de Velde,                   ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
residing in Usingen (Federal Republic of Germany), represented             European Communities on 18 December 2001 by Huntstown
by N. Pflüger, R. Steiner and S. Mittländer, lawyers, with                 Air Park Limited and Omega Aviation Services Limited,
an address for service in Luxembourg, supported by the                     represented by Mr James O’Reilly, SC and Mr Charles A Kelly,
Organisation of Employees in European and International                    Solicitor of Douglas Kelly & Son, Swinford (Ireland).
Institutions in the Federal Republic of Germany (IPSO),
represented by B. Karthaus, M. Roth and C. Roth, lawyers, with
an address for service in Luxembourg, against European
Central Bank (Agents: C. Ziliolo, M. López Torres and B. Wäg-             The applicant claims that the Court should:
enbaur) — application for the annulment and/or a declaration
of inapplicability of Articles 7.2.0 and 8.1.0 of the Staff Rules,
Administrative Circular 01/2000 concerning Travel Expenses,                —    annul the second indent of Part 6 of the Commission’s
the gateway clause inserted into the applicants’ employment                     Decision no C(2001)2967 of 5 October 2001 concerning
contracts and the decision of the President of the ECB of                       State Aid NN 86/2001 — AER RIANTA — IRELAND;
27 November 2000 rejecting the applicants’ complaint, and
for a declaration that the ECB was required to consult the
personnel committee before adopting Administrative Circular                —    order the Commission to pay the applicant’s costs.