CELEX: C2001/061/27
Language: en
Date: 2001-02-24 00:00:00
Title: Case T-349/00: Action brought on 16 November 2000 by Giorgio Lebedef against the Commission of the European Communities

C 61/14                EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                    24.2.2001
                                                        COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
Action brought on 16 November 2000 by Giorgio Lebedef                    In support of his application, the applicant pleads:
  against the Commission of the European Communities
                                                                         —    infringement of the framework agreement concluded
                                                                              between the Commission and the OSPs in 1974, on
                        (Case T-349/00)                                       account of the absence of any objective examination of
                                                                              the representativity of the OSPs and a manifest error in
                                                                              the comparative assessment of that representativity;
                         (2001/C 61/27)
                                                                         —    breach of the principle of equal treatment and non-
                                                                              discrimination;
                   (Language of the case: French)                        —    breach of the principle of the protection of legitimate
                                                                              interests;
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-                —    infringement of the rights of the defence;
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 16 November 2000 by Giorgio                      —    breach of the principle prohibiting arbitrary methods, of
Lebedef, residing at Senningerberg (Luxembourg), represented                  the obligation to provide a statement of reasons and of
by Gilles Bouneou, of the Luxembourg Bar.                                     the duty to have regard for the welfare and interests of
                                                                              officials;
The applicant claims that the Court should:                              —    abuse of powers and improper exercise of authority.
—     annul the ‘Operational Rules on the consultation levels,
      the consultation body and related procedures’ agreed
      between the majority of the trade unions/staff associ-
      ations (‘the OSPs’) and the administration of the Com-
      mission on 19.1.2000;
                                                                         Action brought on 20 November 2000 by Andrew M.
—     alternatively, annul the composition of the consultation           Rosemarine against the Office for Harmonisation in the
      body as provided for by those rules in so far as it                                        Internal Market
      excludes the trade union ‘Action & Défense’ from such
      consultations;                                                                             (Case T-352/00)
—     annul the Commission’s decision of 17.2.2000 refusing                                       (2001/C 61/28)
      to grant the applicant leave to attend, on a mission basis,
      the meeting of the ‘Ad hoc working group on staff reports
      and proposals for the promotion of staff on secondment                               (Language of the case: English)
      and staff elected or designated to fulfil certain functions’
      or to engage on the same basis in any other activity in
      the context of staff representation.                               An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
                                                                         Market (OHIM) was brought before the Court of First Instance
                                                                         of the European Communities on 20 November 2000 by
                                                                         Andrew M. Rosemarine, represented by James Davis, of the
                                                                         Aire Centre, London.
Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                         The applicant claims that the Court should order the OHIM to:
The applicant, a Commission official, seeks annulment of the
                                                                         —    compensate for:
operational rules in issue on the ground that they exclude
from the consultation body the trade union known as ‘Action
& Défense’, of which he is a one of the leaders. He also seeks                —     the sum of the value of the job
annulment of an individual decision taken against him,
refusing to grant him leave to engage in his trade-union                      —     the loss of enjoyment of having a job in Alicante
activities on a mission basis on the ground that such missions
must be restricted exclusively to the OSPs represented on the                 —     the inconvenience of these appeals to the OHIM and
consultation body.                                                                  the Court;