CELEX: C2002/131/40
Language: en
Date: 2002-06-01 00:00:00
Title: Case T-68/02: Action brought on 8 March 2002 by Masdar (U.K.) Ltd against the Commission of the European Communities

1.6.2002               EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                      C 131/21
4.    Order the defendant to pay the applicants the difference        Action brought on 8 March 2002 by Masdar (U.K.) Ltd
      between the statements of earnings actually issued and            against the Commission of the European Communities
      the statements to be issued in accordance with claim 2,
      or in the alternative claim 3;
                                                                                               (Case T-68/02)
5.    Order the defendant to pay the costs.                                                   (2002/C 131/40)
                                                                                         (Language of the case: English)
                                                                      An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
Pleas in law and main arguments                                       ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
                                                                      European Communities on 8 March 2002 by Masdar (U.K.)
                                                                      Ltd, represented by Mr Philip Bentley QC and Mr Patrick Green
                                                                      of Rosemary Smith & Co, Crowthorne (United Kingdom).
The applicants contest the annual salary adjustment for the
                                                                      The applicant claims that the Court should:
year 2001 for staff of the European Central Bank. In 1999 the
Governing Council of the defendant decided that the annual
salary adjustment of the defendant was to be based on the             —     annul the defendant’s refusal to grant the applicant access
average development of nominal salaries of the fifteen national             to the documents mentioned in the applicant’s request
central banks and the Bank for International Settlements as the             dated 16 October 2001;
‘central bank’ of the central banks. This method was to be
applied for three years altogether. By letter of 11 July
2001 the Vice-President of the defendant informed the Staff           —     order the Commission to pay the costs of this application.
Committee that the Governing Council of the defendant
endorsed the Executive Board’s proposal for the salary adjust-
ment for 2001, in accordance with the methodology decided
in 1999. A table annexed to that letter showed that the salary
adjustment for 2001 was to take effect from 1 July 2001 and           Pleas in law and main arguments
would be 2,2 %.
                                                                      The applicant provides consultancy services in the agricultural
                                                                      sector. The applicant was employed by another company in
                                                                      respect of two programs funded by the Commission’s TACIS
On 13 July 2001 the applicants each received statements of            programme. The applicant brought proceedings against this
earnings which were based on the new calculations.                    company before a national Court for the recovery of sums still
                                                                      outstanding. In this respect, the applicant requested access to
                                                                      two audit reports of the Commission established in respect of
                                                                      the contracts in question. This access was refused by the
                                                                      Commission.
The applicants claim that the statements of earnings issued for
July 2001 should be annulled. They submit that the salary
adjustment in 2001 was not the subject of consultation with           The applicant submits that the Commission failed to give
the Staff Committee and is therefore unlawful. The method of          reasons for this decision and has not respected the rights of
calculation applied for the salary adjustment in July 2001            the applicant under Decision 94/90 (1). The applicant further
further infringed Article 13 of the Conditions of Employment,         claims that the Commission violated the principle of good
since it results in a loss of purchasing power at the place of        administration.
employment. A correct method of calculation must take
account at least of the rate of inflation and thus produce a
figure of 2,7 %.
                                                                      (1) 94/90/ECSC, EC, Euratom: Commission Decision of 8 February
                                                                          1994 on public access to Commission documents (OJ L 46 of
                                                                          18.2.1994, p. 58)