CELEX: C1997/108/42
Language: en
Date: 1997-04-05 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 16 January 1997 by Miguel Vicente-Nuñez against the Commission of the European Communities (Case T-7/97)

5 . 4 . 97          I EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                  No C 108/21
2 . orders the applicant to pay the costs.                             Action brought on 27 January 1997 by Viglienzone
                                                                       Adriatica SpA against Commission of the European
                                                                                                 Communities
 (') OJ No C 146, 28 . 5 . 1994, p. 13 ,
     OJ No C 174 , 25 . 6 . 1994, p . 22 .                                                    ( Case T-17/97 )
                                                                                                ( 97/C 108/43
                                                                                      (Language of the case: Italian)
                                                                       An action against the Commission of the European
Action brought on 16 January 1997 by Miguel Vicente­                   Communities was brought before the Court of First
Nunez against the Commission of the European                           Instance on 27 January 1997 by Viglienzone Adriatica
                             Communities
                                                                       SpA, represented by Bruno Elia and Ivano Vigliotti, of the
                            ( Case T-7/97)                             Genoa Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at
                                                                       the chambers of Alex Schmitt, 62 Avenue Guillaume .
                            ( 97/C 108/42 )
                                                                       The applicant claims that the Court of First Instance
                (Language of the case: French)                         should :
                                                                       — annul, pursuant to the fourth paragraph of Article 173
An action against the Commission of the European                           of the EC Treaty, the finding by which the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First                          Commission, on 11 November 1996 , rejected
Instance of the European Communities on 16 January
                                                                           Viglienzone Adriatica SpA's application for
1997 by Miguel Vicente-Nunez, residing at Krainem                          prequalification for call for tenders No 96/C 177/08
( Belgium ), represented by Marc-Albert Lucas, of the Liege                concerning the control of food aid,
Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the
Chambers of Evelyne Korn, 21 Rue de Nassau.
                                                                       — if necessary, annul or in any event declare
                                                                           inapplicable, under Article 184 of the EC Treaty,
The applicant claims that the Court should:                                point 10, paragraph ( c ) (4 ) (in so far as it relates to
                                                                           the list of subsidiaries in the Member States of the
                                                                           European Union ) and the first sentence of the third
— annul the decision of the Commission of 22 March                         paragraph of point 12 ( in so far as it excludes the
      1996 , addressed to the applicant on 27 March and                    possibility of challenging decisions of the scrutiny
      received on 28 March, inasmuch as it rejected his                    committee ) of notice of tender No 96/C 177/08
      request of November 1995 to be reclassified in                       concerning 'European Union food aid/food security'
      another grade on the basis of Article 31 ( 2 ) of the                and 'prequalification of firms for participation in the
      Staff Regulations,                                                   forthcoming restricted invitation to tender for the
                                                                           provision of services relating to the coordination of
                                                                           consignments and quality and quantity control of
— annul in so far as necessary the decision of the                         foodstuffs, supplies as food aid',
      Commission of 16 October rejecting the complaint
      lodged by the applicant on 27 June 1996 against that
      decision,                                                        — adopt any other measure considered necessary,
                                                                       — order the Commission to pay the costs .
— order the Commission to pay the costs .
                                                                       Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
                                                                       The applicant is an company whose application for
                                                                       prequalification for the purposes of notice of tender No 96/
The applicant, an official in Grade A 6, Step 2, relies on             C 177/08 concerning 'European Union food aid/food
the same plea in law as in the action which he brought                 security' and 'prequalification of firms for participation in
against the Commission of the European Communities on                  the forthcoming restricted invitation to tender for the
27 June 1996 (T-100/96 ), alleging that Article 32 of the              provision of services relating to the coordination of
Staff Regulations and the sixth and eighth paragraphs of               consignments and quality and quantity control of
Article 2 of the Commission's decision of 1 September                  foodstuffs, supplies as food aid' ( J ) was rejected.
1983 have been infringed and that the principle of equal
treatment has been breached. According to the applicant,
the Commission has, moreover, disregarded the level and                In support of its claims, the applicant alleges, first,
extent of his experience prior to his joining the                      infringement of Article 190 of the Treaty. It states that the
Commission .                                                           duty to state reasons is particularly important in the case
                                                                       of measures which affect the legal position of the
                                                                       addressees, and that the contested measure has a
                                                                       considerable legal impact on Viglienzone, in so far as it