CELEX: C2001/095/41
Language: en
Date: 2001-03-24 00:00:00
Title: Case T-23/01: Action brought on 26 January 2001 by Eugene Emile Marie Kimman against Commission of the European Communities

24.3.2001             EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                         C 95/21
Action brought on 26 January 2001 by Eugene Emile                        Action brought on 30 January 2001 by Claire Staelen
Marie Kimman against Commission of the European                          against European Parliament and Council of the European
                          Communities                                                                  Union
                         (Case T-23/01)
                                                                                                   (Case T-24/01)
                         (2001/C 95/41)
                                                                                                   (2001/C 95/42)
                   (Language of the case: French)
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-                                   (Language of the case: French)
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 26 January 2001 by Eugene Emile
Marie Kimman, residing in Overijse (Belgium), represented
by Nicolas Lhoëst, avocat, with an address for service in                An action against the European Parliament and the Council of
Luxembourg.                                                              the European Union was brought before the Court of First
                                                                         Instance of the European Communities on 30 January 2001
                                                                         by Claire Staelen, residing in Bridel (Luxembourg), represented
The applicant claims that the Court should:                              by Joëlle Choucroun, avocat, with an address for service in
                                                                         Luxembourg.
—     annul the decision of the Commission of 25 May 2000
      in so far as it reduces the applicant’s annual leave for
      2000 by one day;                                                   The applicant claims that the Court should:
—     order the defendant to pay the costs.                              —     annul the entire marking procedure in respect of the
                                                                               written tests for the competition or annul the decision of
                                                                               the selection board for competition Eur/151/98 awarding
                                                                               the applicant, for the written test, a mark which did not
Pleas in law and main arguments                                                allow her to be included in the reserve list;
The applicant, who at the material time was serving with the             —     in the alternative, order the Parliament and the Council
Commission Delegation in Latvia, contests the decision of the                  to pay to the applicant EUR 12 000 in respect of the
appointing authority to reduce by one day her annual leave                     non-material damage caused;
allowance for 2000. That decision was purportedly based on
the fact that the delegation in question was closed for 7 days
instead of the 6 days provided for in the Commission’s decision          —     order the defendants to pay the costs.
of 17 July 1997.
In support of her claims, the applicant alleges:
                                                                         Pleas in law and main arguments
—     Unlawfulness of the Commission’s decision of 17 July
      1997 restricting to 6 days per year the maximum number
      of days on which the offices of the Delegation of the
      External Services may be closed, inasmuch as it fails to           The applicant in the present case was admitted to Competition
      observe the principle of equality as between officials.            EUR/151/98 designed to draw up a list of eligible persons
                                                                         to be held in reserve for recruitment as French-language
                                                                         administrators.
—     Infringement of the special Commission Decision of
      21 December 1998 laying down the number of official
      holidays for 1999.
                                                                         She claims in the respect to have learnt that the selection board
                                                                         had changed the minimum number of points required to pass
—     Infringement of Article 60 of the Staff Regulations.               the first two written, thus increasing the number of candidates
                                                                         who initially passed those two tests without that decision
                                                                         being justified by a small number of candidates having
                                                                         obtained the requisite number of points. That irregularity
                                                                         significantly distorted the final result of the competition.