CELEX: C1995/248/34
Language: en
Date: 1995-09-23 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 7 July 1995 by Christos Michaël against the Commission of the European Communities (Case T-144/95)

23 . 9 . 95            EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                 No C 248/ 15
   Action brought on 5 July 1995 by Jean-Louis Delvaux                Lastly, he considers that the promotion procedure
   against the Commission of the European Communities                 established by the Commission in the Translation Service is
                        ( Case T-142/95 )                             contrary to Articles 5 ( 3 ) and 27 of the Staff Regulations, in
                                                                      so far as, first, it does not secure for the institution the
                          ( 95/C 248/33 )
                                                                      services of officials of the highest standard of ability,
                                                                      efficiency and integrity, and, secondly, it does not guarantee
                                                                      identical conditions of service career .
                 (Language of the case: French)
                                                                      As regards the claim for damages, the applicant states that
An action against the Commission of the European                      the irregularity of the promotion procedure for 1994 caused
 Communities was brought before the Court of First                    his unjustified exclusion from the list of officials considered
Instance on 5 July 1995 by Jean-Louis Delvaux, resident in            the most deserving of promotion and also, possibly, from
Rhode-St. Genese ( Belgium), represented by Nicolas Lhoest,           the list of officials promoted; he maintains that he has
 of the Brussels Bar, with an address for service in                  suffered ascertainable damage linked to the loss of a chance
 Luxembourg c/o Ann Branch, 39 , Avenue Victor Hugo .                 of promotion in 1994, which could in particular have led to
                                                                      a higher salary, the right to a higher pension and the right to
                                                                      apply for A 3 posts .
 The applicant claims that the Court should :
 — annul the Commission's decision, which appeared in
      Informations administratives No 858 of 2 September
      1994 , not to include the applicant's name on the list of
      officials considered the most deserving of promotion to
      Grade LA 4 in 1994,
                                                                      Action brought on 7 July 1995 by Christos Michael against
                                                                             the Commission of the European Communities
 — annul the Commission's decision, which appeared in
                                                                                              ( Case T-144/95 )
      Informations administratives No 859 of 8 September
      1994, not to include the applicant's name on the list of                                  ( 95/C 248/34 )
      officials considered the most deserving of promotion to
      Grade LA 4 in 1994,
                                                                                      (Language of the case: French)
 — if necessary, annul the express decision of rejection
      adopted by the Commission on 3 April 1995 in reply to            An action against the Commission of the European
      the applicant's complaint;                                       Communities was brought before the Court of First
                                                                       Instance on 7 July 1995 by Christos Michael, resident in
 — order the defendant to pay a lump sum of Bfrs 100 000               Brussels, represented by Lucas Vogel, of the Brussels Bar,
      as compensation for the irregularity of the promotion            with an adress for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers
      procedure which caused harm to the applicant,                    of Christian Kremer, 8—10 Rue Mathias Hardt.
 — order the defendant to pay all the costs .                          The applicant claims that the Court should :
                                                                       — annul the implied decision, considered to have been
  Fleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                      taken on 7 April 1995 , rejecting the complaint made on
                                                                           7 December 1994 by the applicant to the appointing
  The applicant relies, first, on breach of Article 46 of the Staff        authority challenging the decision on promotions to
  Regulations of Officials, claiming that the appointing                   Grade A 4 for 1994 ( decision published in Informations
  authority did not carry out a comparative examination of                 administratives of 8 September 1994 );
  the merits and staff reports of all promotable officials and
' also that it did not take into account all the applicant's           — oder the defendant to pay the costs .
  merits, in particular those acquired outside his linguistic
  unit . In addition he maintains that in the course of the
  promotion procedure he was the subject of criticism , in              Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
  conditions contrary to Article 26 of the Staff Regulations, to
  which he could not respond and which played a determinant
                                                                        The applicant alleges infringement of the principle of
  role in his being excluded from the list of officials proposed        non-discrimination and of Article 45 ( 1 ) of the Staff
  for promotion.
                                                                        Regulations , as well as of the implementing provisions
                                                                        contained in the Commission's Decision of 21 December
  The applicant points out, furthermore, that the contested             1970 , amended by Decision of 14 July 1971 , inasmuch as
   decisions are vitiated by the complete absence of a statement        the appointing authority did not undertake a 'consideration
   of the grounds on which they were based, in breach of the            of the comparative merits of the officials eligible for
   second paragraph of Article 25 of the Staff Regulations .            promotion and of the reports on them'.
 ---pagebreak--- No C 248/ 16            EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                      23 . 9 . 95
He states in this connection that his staff report for the             — order the Parliament to pay the costs .
period 1991 /93 was notified to him only on 1 July 1994,
belatedly in relation to what is laid down in the provisions           Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
applicable; notification in fact took place after publication
of the list of officials most deserving of promotion drawn up
by Directorate-General XX for 1994 . When examining the                The applicant challenges the decision by the Parliament,
                                                                       notified by letter of 29 September 1994 , to take steps to
applicant's case, the promotions committee therefore had
available only a belated and inaccurate staff report, since it         recover, pursuant to Article 85 of the Staff Regulations, part
was subsequently amended after the applicant had                       of the household allowance that she had been receiving from
submitted a compliant. The applicant concludes that the list           1 June 1987 corresponding to the prime de menage paid to
of officials most deserving of promotion drawn up on that              her husband by the Luxembourg authorities over the same
basis by the promotions committee, and the subsequent                  period . She considers that the rule against overlapping
promotion decisions adopted by the appointing authority,               benefits is not applicable in her case, since both the legal
are void pursuant to Article 45 of the Staff Regulations .             nature and the conditions for granting the household
                                                                       allowance are completely different from those governing the
                                                                       prime de menage.
The applicant states further that the promotions committee
committed a manifest error of assessment in calculating his
seniority in the grade . He considers that that seniority              The applicant points out in this connection that under
should have been calculated from 1985 , the date on which              Luxembourg legislation the prime de menage: ( a ) is
he was promoted to LA 5 , and not from 1989 , the date on              contractual in nature; ( b ) is paid regardless of family
which he was appointed to Grade A 5 having succeeded in                expenses; and ( c ) is subject to tax. She concludes that despite
internal competition COM/2/87 for transfer from the                    its name, the prime de menage is not a family allowance , in
Language Service to Category A.                                        contrast to the household allowance paid by the European
                                                                       Communities .
Action brought on 13 July 1995 by Genevieve Pavan against              Action brought on 14 July 1995 by etablissements
                     the European Parliament                           J. Richard Ducros against the Commission of the European
                                                                                                   Communities
                         ( Case T-l 47/95 )
                           ( 95/C 248/35 )                                                      ( Case T-149/95 )
                                                                                                  ( 95/C 248/36 )
                 (Language of the case: French)
                                                                                      (Language of the case: French)
An action against the European Parliament was brought
before the Court of First Instance on 13 July 1995 by                  An action against the Commission of the European
Genevieve Pavan, resident in Luxembourg, represented by                Communities was brought before the Court of First
Alain Lorang, of the Luxembourg Bar, with an address for               Instance of the European Communities on 14 July 1995 by
service in Luxembourg at the latter's Chambers, 51 Rue                 Etablissements J. Richard Ducros, established in Paris,
Albert ler .                                                           represented by Philippe Genin, of the Lyons Bar, with an
                                                                       address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of
                                                                       Aloyse May, 31 Grand-rue .
The applicant claims that the Court should :
                                                                       The applicant claims that the Court should:
— annul the decision adopted on 29 September 1994 by the
     European Parliament pursuant to Article 85 of the Staff           — annul the decision of the Commission closing the
     Regulations,                                                           procedure which it had initiated,
— declare that the prime de menage received by the                     — order the defendant to pay costs .
     applicant's husband should not be set off against the
     household allowance received by her,
                                                                        Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
— declare that the European Parliament should reimburse                The applicant, a public limited liability company
     all the sums improperly retained pursuant to the decision          incorporated under French law, engaged in the metal
     of 29 September 1994 ,                                             construction and boiler-marking sector, contests the
                                                                        Decision of the Commission, published in the Official
— declare that the applicant should receive in their entirety          Journal of the European Communities of 16 May 1995
     all the household allowance payments that should have              under No C 120, p. 4 , in which it decided to close the
     been paid from December 1994 ,                                     procedure initiated on 11 March 1992 under Article 93 ( 2 )