CELEX: C2002/247/30
Language: en
Date: 2002-10-12 00:00:00
Title: Case T-227/02: Action brought on 26 July 2002 by Syndicat des Fonctionnaires Internationaux et Européens against Commission of the European Communities

12.10.2002             EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                      C 247/19
The applicant claims that the Court should:                            Action brought on 26 July 2002 by Syndicat des Fonction-
                                                                       naires Internationaux et Européens against Commission
                                                                                        of the European Communities
—     annul the decision of the appointing authority on
      27 March 2002 and notified to the applicant on 16 April
      2002, rejecting the complaint lodged by the applicant on
      18 October 2001, adopting the decision of the Members                                     (Case T-227/02)
      of the Commission of 15 June 2001, ‘approving’ the
      alleged agreement of 4 April 2001 between Vice President
      Kinnock and the trade unions and staff associations
      concerning the resources available to the staff representa-                               (2002/C 247/30)
      tives and the rules regarding resources available to the
      staff representatives from 1 January 2002;
                                                                                          (Language of the case: French)
—     annul the abovementioned decision of 15 June 2001;
—     order the defendant to pay the costs.
                                                                       An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
                                                                       ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
                                                                       European Communities on 26 July 2002 by Syndicat des
                                                                       Fonctionnaires Internationaux et Européens (SFIE), whose
Pleas in law and main arguments                                        main offices are in Brussels, represented by Lucas Vogel and
                                                                       Dominique Amatulli, lawyers.
The applicant is the secretary general of the Syndicat des
Fonctionnaires Internationaux et Européens (SFIE). He is
contesting the decision laying down the rules regarding                The applicant claims that the Court should:
resources available to the staff representatives from 1 January
2002 approving an agreement between certain union organis-
ations and the Commission. Not being a signatory to that               —     annul the decision of the appointing authority on
agreement of 4 April 2001, the SFIE was informed that it                     27 March 2002 and notified to the applicant on 16 April
would not be able to benefit from the budgetary facilities                   2002, rejecting the complaint lodged by the applicant on
under those provisions.                                                      18 October 2001, adopting the decision of the Members
                                                                             of the Commission of 15 June 2001, ‘approving’ the
                                                                             alleged agreement of 4 April 2001 between Vice President
                                                                             Kinnock and the trade unions and staff associations
                                                                             concerning the resources available to the staff representa-
In support of his application, the applicant pleads, first,
infringement of Articles 11 and 12 of the agreement entered                  tives and the rules regarding resources available to the
into by the Commission and the unions adopted on 20 Septem-                  staff representatives from 1 January 2002;
ber 1974. According to the applicant, the contested decision
merely approved the agreement of 4 April 2001, whereas the
said agreement had not been agreed to by all the unions and            —     annul the abovementioned decision of 15 June 2001;
could not therefore be regarded as effective.
                                                                       —     order the defendant to pay the costs.
Secondly, the applicant pleads infringement of Article 24a of
the Staff Regulations, Articles 18, 19 and 20 of the framework
agreement of 20 September 1974, manifest error of assessment
and breach of the principle of non-discrimination. According
to the applicant, the effect of the agreement of 4 April 2001 is       Pleas in law and main arguments
that of sharing the financial and human resources necessary to
the running of the unions in accordance with the criteria of
representativity. The applicant claims that those criteria are
erroneous and arbitrary, since they favour unfairly certain
                                                                       The pleas in law and main arguments put forward in this case
unions and no longer allow unions freely to choose their own
political action.                                                      are identical with those in Case T-226/02.