CELEX: C1996/233/39
Language: en
Date: 1996-08-10 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 21 June 1996 by Mario Costacurta against the Commission of the European Communities (Case T-98/96)

10 . 8 . 96             EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                No C 233 /23
    imposing in a more proportionate manner requirements                Secondly, the applicant maintains that the decision of
    for contributions to the costs of universal services .              26 July 1988 has been disregarded, in that, first, the
                                                                        contested decision was adopted out of time and, secondly,
(') OJ No L 74 , 13 . 3 . 1996 , p . 13 .                               the procedure leading to that decision was not transparent
                                                                        and the applicant was not consulted but confronted with a
                                                                        fait accompli.
Action brought on 21 June 1996 by Mario Costacurta                      Thirdly, according to the applicant, the contested decision
  against the Commission of the European Communities                    does not comply with the requirements entailed by the duty
                                                                        to state reasons .
                          ( Case T-98/96
                            ( 96/C 233/39 )                             Lastly, the applicant argues that the Commission infringed
                                                                        in his case the principles of the protection of legitimate
                  (Language of tbe case: Frencb)                        expectations and of legal certainty, impaired both his
                                                                        legitimate non-pecuniary and pecuniary rights and misused
An action against the Commission of the European                        its powers .
Communities was brought before the Court of First
Instance of the European Communities on 21 June 1996 by
Mario Costacurta , residing at Kinshara ( Zaïre ), represented
by Nicolas Decker, of the Luxembourg Bar, with an address
for service in Luxembourg at the latter's Chambers, 16
Avenue Marie-Thérèse .
                                                                        Action brought on 27 June 1996 by Maria Elisabeth Wolf
The applicant claims that the Court should :                              against the Commission of the European Communities
— annul        the   decision     of   the  Committee    for  the                              ( Case T-101 /96 )
    Administration of Delegations of the Commission of the                                       ( 96/C 233 /40 )
    European Communities , confirmed by the appointing
    authority, contained in Notes No 17493 of
     14 December 1995 , No 8908 of 30 April 1 996 ,                                     (Language of tb e case: Frencb)
    No 14515 of 31 May 19 96 and the appointing
    instrument of 31 May 1996 , assigning the applicant to              An action against the Commission of the European
    the Office for Official Publications of the European                Communities was brought before the Court of First
    Communities in Luxembourg,                                          Instance of the European Communities on 27 June 1 996 by
— order the Commission to pay all expenses and costs                    Maria Elisabeth Wolf, residing at Mamer ( Grand Duchy of
    incurred in these proceedings , together with those                 Luxembourg ), represented by Jean-Noël Louis, Thierry
    relating to the procedure for interim relief.                       Demaseure and Ariane Tournel, all of the Brussels Bar, with
                                                                        an address for service in Luxembourg at the offices of
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                     Fiduciaire Myson Sari , 1 Rue Glesener.
The applicant, a Commission official , who has been serving             The applicant claims that the Court should :
with the Commission's delegation to Zaïre for three years,
contests the appointing authority's decision reassigning him
to the Office for Official Publications of the European                 — annul the decision not to admit the applicant to
Communities in Luxembourg .                                                 competition COM/A/955 ,
The applicant alleges , first, infringement of the rotation             — order the Commission to pay the applicant ECU 1 in
system established by the Commission's decision of 26 July                  symbolic damages for the non-material damage
1988 concerning ' orientations about the new rotation                       suffered ,
system '. That decision was taken on the basis of Articles 2
and 3 of Annex X to the Staff Regulations, which provide                — order the Commission to pay the costs .
that officials serving in a non-member country are to be
alternately transferred between delegations and the
Commission's seat. Those provisions were infringed in that              Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
the Committee for the Administration of Delegations and
the appointing authority included the Office for Official               The applicant argues that, contrary to what is stated in the
Publications in the rotation system , since that body is not            reasons given for the contested decision , which refer to her
covered by the rotation system and cannot be regarded as                lack of the 12 years ' minimum professional experience
the Commission's seat. Furthermore, the applicant had not               required in the competition notice, she has more than 12
yet completed eight years ' service with the delegation , which         years' professional experience at university level acquired
means that the qualifying period for alternate reassignment             subsequently to the degree qualifying her for the
to the delegation or the seat — currently eight years — has in          competition . In her submission , it cannot seriously be
this case been disregarded . Also, the applicant was no longer          denied that the research work undertaken in preparing her
subject to that system since he had been reassigned                     doctoral thesis caused her to carry out tasks in relation to the
definitively .                                                          statistical area described in the notice of competition .