CELEX: C1998/094/88
Language: en
Date: 1998-03-28 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 28 January 1998 by Albert Nardone against the Commission of the European Communities (Case T-27/98)

C 94/38              EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                     28.3.98
    procedure in the present case as well as infringement           Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
    of the reasonable period' rule and the principle of
    sound administration. A suspension decision may be              The applicant, a former official of the European
    validly justified only in so far as disciplinary                Parliament, seeks the annulment of a decision which, in
    proceedings are brought against the official or servant         his own view, impliedly suggests that he was responsible
    who has been suspended and pending a disciplinary               for certain financial losses.
    measure. However, in this case, the Disciplinary Board
    did not find, in its recommendation, that there had
    been serious misconduct. Moreover, an abnormally                In support of his claim he alleges, first of all, that the
    lengthy period elapsed between, on the one hand, the            disciplinary measure of 18 January 1988, on whose
    opening of the disciplinary procedure and referral to           lawfulness the Community judicature was called upon to
    the Disciplinary Board and, on the other, the opinion           rule, was based on, among other grounds, the loss of
    of the Disciplinary Board and the disciplinary decision,        supporting documents, not on the loss of cash, a
    which, five and a half months later, has still not been         disciplinary complaint which was expressly ruled out by
    adopted,                                                        the Disciplinary Board.
                                                                    The applicant considers, moreover, that the contested
Ð infringement of Article 25 of the Staff Regulations, of           decision was taken in breach of the Financial Regulation
    the right to a fair hearing and of the principle of legal       of 21 December 1977 applicable to the general budget of
    certainty. The applicant states in this regard, first, that     the European Communities. That decision is also based
    no reasons were given for the contested suspension              both on the (mis)handling of accounting concepts and on
    decision which contradicts the Disciplinary Board's             documents which are either forged or anonymous.
    finding and, secondly, that all the documents on which
    the adoption of that decision was based were not
    disclosed to him in sufficient time to allow him to             Finally, in the context of his claim for compensation, he
    make comments.                                                  also relies on the violation of a number of fundamental
                                                                    principles of law, in particular of the rights of the defence.
                                                                    In particular, the applicant criticises the defendant for
                                                                    prohibiting him from gaining access to his own file and
                                                                    for using forged or unsigned documents in the procedure
                                                                    which led to the contested decision.
Action brought on 21 January 1998 by Henri de Compte
                against European Parliament
                       (Case T-25/98)
                         (98/C 94/87)
                                                                    Action brought on 28 January 1998 by Albert Nardone
                                                                      against the Commission of the European Communities
               (Language of the case: French)
                                                                                            (Case T-27/98)
                                                                                             (98/C 94/88)
An action against European Parliament was brought
before the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities on 21 January 1998 by Henri de Compte,                                 (Language of the case: French)
residing at Longeville-Les-Metz, represented by Henri
Ferretti, of the Thionville Bar, with an address for service        An action against the Commission of the European
in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Guy Harles, 8Ð10 rue               Communities was brought before the Court of First
Mathias Hardt.                                                      Instance of the European Communities on 28 January
                                                                    1998 by Albert Nardone, residing at PieÂtrain (Belgium),
                                                                    represented by Georges Vandersanden and Laure Levi, of
The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                    the Brussels Bar, with an address for service in
                                                                    Luxembourg at Fiduciaire Myson SARL, 30 rue de Ces-
Ð annul Decision No A4-0125/97 of 10 April 1997                     sange.
    Decision giving discharge in respect of the
    implementation of the budget for the financial year             The applicant claims that the Court should:
    1995 Ð Section I Ð European Parliament/
    Ombudsman Annex' (OJ C 132/148, 28.4.1997,
    p. 148),                                                        Ð annul the decision taken by the appointing authority
                                                                        on 29 May 1997 following the request that an
                                                                        occupational disease be recognised in accordance with
Ð find the European Parliament liable for the harm                      Article 17 of the Rules on sickness insurance for
    suffered by the applicant and, accordingly, order the               officials of the European Communities and, in so far
    European Parliament to pay to him such an amount as                 as necessary, annul the implied decision rejecting the
    the Court may consider equitable,                                   complaint lodged by the applicant against that
                                                                        decision of 29 May,
Ð order the European Parliament to pay the costs,
    including those relating to the pre-litigation procedure.       Ð order the Commission to pay the costs.
 ---pagebreak--- 28.3.98              EN                Official Journal of the European Communities                                   C 94/39
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:               The applicant claims that the Court should:
On 29 May 1997 the appointing authority took the                  Ð annul the decision of 6 January 1997 determining
decision to accept that the applicant, a former official at           Brussels as the applicant's place of recruitment and, in
the Commission, who had worked in the Berlaymont                      so far as necessary, annul the decision rejecting her
building in Brussels, suffered 6 % partial permanent                  complaint,
invalidity (PPI). That decision was based on the findings
of a medical committee.                                           Ð grant the applicant, by the same token, the rights to
                                                                      which she is entitled under Article 7 of Annex VII to
                                                                      the Staff Regulations and all the other rights under the
The applicant maintains that the work of the medical                  Staff Regulations flowing from determining Stockholm
committee is vitiated by several irregularities. That                 as her place of recruitment,
committee did not complete its mission and was not given
all the relevant reports.
                                                                  Ð order the defendant to pay the costs.
Moreover, the medical committee's opinion does not                Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
contain a comprehensible link between the medical
considerations and its conclusions, nor does it provide an
                                                                  The applicant, an official of Swedish nationality at the
adequate statement of reasons.
                                                                  Commission since December 1996, contests the
                                                                  defendant's decision to determine Brussels as her place of
By not noting the numerous irregularities committed by            recruitment.
that committee, the appointing authority in its turn
breached the principle of good management sound                   The applicant maintains that throughout 1996 and at the
administration.                                                   time when she took up her duties, she was permanently
                                                                  employed and habitually resident in Sweden. For that
                                                                  reason, the applicant's place of recruitment was and could
                                                                  be no other than Stockholm. In taking the contested
                                                                  decision, the defendant infringed Article 7 of Annex VII to
                                                                  the Staff Regulations.
Action brought on 4 February 1998 by Jannice Kjellberg
   against the Commission of the European Communities
                       (Case T-28/98)
                         (98/C 94/89)                                   Removal from the register of Case T-240/97 (1)
                                                                                           (98/C 94/90)
               (Language of the case: French)
                                                                                 (Language of the case: French)
An action against the Commission of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First                 By order of 16 January 1998 the President of the Fifth
Instance of the European Communities on 4 February                Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European
1998 by Jannice Kjellberg, residing at Brussels,                  Communities has ordered the removal from the register of
represented by Georges Vandersanden and Laure Levi, of            Case T-240/97: Luc Verheyden v. Commission of the
the Brussels Bar, with an address for service in                  European Communities.
Luxembourg at Fiduciaire Myson SARL, 30 rue de Ces-
sange.                                                            (1) OJ C 331, 1.11.1997.