CELEX: C1999/366/64
Language: en
Date: 1999-12-18 00:00:00
Title: Case T-260/99: Action brought on 26 October 1999 by Marie-Josée Bollendorff against the European Parliament

C 366/30                EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                    18.12.1999
The applicants claim that the Court should:                                    — the contested interpretation infringes fundamental
                                                                                    rights, by disregarding the right to freedom of associ-
— annul the decision of the European Parliament dated                               ation and the principle of equal treatment.
    14 September 1999 concerning the interpretation of the
    Rules of Procedure;
— declare the interpretation of Rule 29(1) of the Rules of
    Procedure proposed by the Committee on Constitutional
    Affairs and the Rules of Procedure to be contrary to the
    Community legal order, the rule of law, the founding
    principles of the Union and fundamental rights.                        Action brought on 26 October 1999 by Marie-Josée
                                                                                   Bollendorff against the European Parliament
Pleas in law and main arguments                                                                     (Case T-260/99)
The applicants, who are Members of the European Parliament,                                         (1999/C 366/64)
state that on 19 July 1999 the constitution of the ‘Groupe
Technique des Députés Indépendants (TDI) — Groupe mixte’
was communicated to the President of the Parliament, in                                       (Language of the case: French)
accordance with Rule 29 of the Parliament’s Rules of Pro-
cedure. At the plenary sitting on 20 July all the political groups         An action against the European Parliament was brought before
opposed the creation of that mixed group. The Committee on                 the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
Constitutional Affairs and the Rules of Procedure was therefore            26 October 1999 by Marie-Josée Bollendorff, resident in
called upon to provide an opinion on the conformity of that                Bertrange, Luxembourg, represented by Laurent Mosar, of the
new group with Rule 29(1) of the Rules of Procedure. It                    Luxembourg Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg
proposed an interpretation to the effect that it is not possible,          at his Chambers, 8 Rue Notre-Dame.
within the meaning of that rule, to accept the constitution of a
group which openly denies possessing any political character
and the existence of any political affinities between its                  The applicant claims that the Court should:
members. On 14 September 1999 the matter was submitted
to a vote of the Parliament, which, by a simple majority,                  — annul the decision by which the appointing authority held
adopted the interpretation proposed by the Committee. It is                    her absence from 9 March 1999 to 12 March 1999 to be
that decision of the Parliament which is contested in the                      unauthorised and deducted 28.50 working hours from her
present case.                                                                  annual leave;
                                                                           — in the alternative, in so far as is necessary annul the express
In support of their action, the applicants advance two pleas in                decision of the European Parliament, notified on 26 July
law:                                                                           1999, rejecting her complaint under Article 90(2) of the
                                                                               Staff Regulations;
(a) T h e d i s c r i m i n a t o r y n a t u r e o f t h e c o n -
    tested decision:                                                       — order the European Parliament to pay the applicant the
                                                                               sum of LUF 100 000 by way of damages for non-pecuniary
    — the contested interpretation necessarily involves                        harm;
         unequal treatment, inasmuch as it has the effect of
         denying the Members concerned the administrative                  — order the European Parliament to pay the costs.
         advantages and the benefit of being able to participate
         in the work of the Parliament which are conferred by
         membership of a Parliamentary group;                              Pleas in law and main arguments
    — the contested interpretation diverges from most Euro-                The applicant disputes that her absences were improper,
         pean legislative systems and parliamentary practices.             contending:
(b) F a i l u r e t o r e s p e c t t h e C o m m u n i t y ’ s            — that the second paragraph of Article 25 of the Staff
    legal order and the rule of law in the                                     Regulations has been infringed in that the defendant did
    substantive sense of the term:                                             not notify her of any decision withdrawing days of leave;
    — the contested interpretation violates the general prin-              — that her right to a fair hearing has been infringed in that
         ciple of legal certainty, in that it is manifestly contrary           she was not asked to explain her conduct, in particular as
         to the spirit of the Rules of Procedure and fails to                  regards her failure to attend the medical examinations. Nor
         observe the principle of the protection of legitimate                 should the validity of the medical certificate produced by
         expectations, which has crystallised around the pro-                  her have been denied without her first undergoing a
         vision in question over the last twenty years;                        medical examination;
 ---pagebreak--- 18.12.1999            EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                     C 366/31
— that Article 60 of the Staff Regulations has been                     Partial removal from the register in Joined Cases T-320/94
     erroneously applied in that the aim of that provision is to                                  and Others (1)
     penalize the production of medical certificates issued
     purely to oblige the patient and not the infringement of a                                 (1999/C 366/67)
     duty of good faith. Since the defendant alleged that the
     applicant had infringed a duty of good faith, it was required
                                                                                          (Language of the case: German)
     to found its decision solely on Article 86 of the Staff
     Regulations instead of on Article 60.
                                                                        By order of 29 September 1999 the President of the Fourth
The applicant submits finally that, by failing to comply with           Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European
the Staff Regulations and refusing to assist her in proceedings         Communities has ordered the removal of Cases T-320/94,
against the medical officer, the defendant has infringed                T-323/94, T-324/94, T-332/94, T-333/94, T-344/94,
Article 24 of those Regulations so as to give rise to liability on      T-345/94 and T-351/94 from the list of Joined Cases T-320/94
its part.                                                               and Others: Klaus Harings and Others v Council of the
                                                                        European Union and Commission of the European Communi-
                                                                        ties.
                                                                        (1) OJ No C 351 of 10.12.1994.
Partial removal from the register in Joined Cases T-85/93
                          and Others (1)
                        (1999/C 366/65)
                                                                        Removal from the register of Joined Cases T-363/94 and
                  (Language of the case: German)                                                    Others (1)
By order of 29 September 1999 the President of the Fourth                                       (1999/C 366/68)
Chamber, Extended Composition, of the Court of First Instance
of the European Communities has ordered the removal                                       (Language of the case: German)
of Cases T-85/93, T-87/93, T-126/93, T-130/93, T-35/94,
T-40/94, T-198/94, T-212/94, T-227/94, T-236/94,                        By order of 29 September 1999 the President of the Fourth
T-237/94, T-238/94, T-278/94, T-279/94, T-281/94,                       Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European
T-283/94, T-284/94, T-349/94, T-350/94, T-357/94 and                    Communities has ordered the removal from the register of
T-360/94 from the list of Joined Cases T-85/93 and Others:              Joined Cases T-363/94 and Others: Benno and Hans Georg
Helmut Bösl and Others v Council of the European Union and              Theunissen and Others v Council of the European Union and
Commission of the European Communities.                                 Commission of the European Communities.
(1) OJ Nos C 178 of 18.7.1990, C 34 of 9.2.1991, C 90 of 26.3.1994,     (1) OJ No C 370 of 24.12.1994, C 400 of 31.12.1994, C 54 of
    C 218 of 6.8.1994, C 304 of 29.10.1994 and C 370 of
                                                                            4.3.1995, C 74 of 25.3.1995 and C 119 of 13.5.1995.
    24.12.1994.
Partial removal from the register in Joined Cases T-85/93               Partial removal from the register in Joined Cases T-366/94
                          and Others (1)                                                          and Others (1)
                        (1999/C 366/66)                                                         (1999/C 366/69)
                  (Language of the case: German)                                         (Language of the cases: German)
By order of 29 September 1999 the President of the Fourth               By order of 29 September 1999, the President of the Fourth
Chamber, Extended Composition, of the Court of First Instance           Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European
of the European Communities has ordered the removal of the              Communities has ordered the removal of Cases T-366/94,
names of the applicants Peter Dalhaus, Klaus Buck, Karl-Heinz           T-3/95, T-14/95, T-120/95 and T-124/95 from the list of
Rohler and Ludger Beckhoff from the list of applicants in Case          cases in Joined Cases T-366/94 and Others: Hilde Diekmeier
T-247/94 - Joined Cases T-85/93 and Others: Helmut Bösl and             and Others v Council of the European Union and Commission
Others v Council of the European Union and Commission of                of the European Communities.
the European Communities.
                                                                        (1) OJ No C 370 of 24.12.1994, No C 54 of 4.3.1995, No C 74 of
(1) OJ No C 233 of 20.8.1994.                                               25.3.1995, No C 174 of 8.7.1995 and No C 208 of 12.8.1995.