CELEX: C1995/351/32
Language: en
Date: 1995-12-30 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 27 October 1995 by Heinrich Gottmann against the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities (Case T-202/95)

No C 351 / 16         EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                  30 . 12 . 95
Action brought on 26 October 1995 by Dimitrios Coussios               Action brought on 27 October 1995 by Heinrich Gottmann
  against the Commission of the European Communities                  against the Council of the European Union and the
                        ( Case T-200/95                                         Commission of the European Communities
                          ( 95/C 351 /31 )                                                   ( Case T-202/95 )
                                                                                               ( 95/C 351 /32 )
                 (Language of the case: Greek)                                       (Language of the case: German)
                                                                      An action against the Council of the European Union and
                                                                      the Commission of the European Communities was brought
An action against the Commission of the European                      before the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First                     Communities on 27 October 1995 by Heinrich Gottmann,
Instance on 26 October 1995 by Dimitrios Coussios,                    residing at Volkmarsen-Külte ( Federal Republic of
represented by Georgios Sakellaropoulos, of the Athens Bar,           Germany ), represented by Bernd Meisterernst, Mechtild
with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers             Düsing, Dietrich Manstetten, Dr Frank Schulze and Dr
of Aloyse May, 31 Grand Rue .                                         Winfried Haneklaus, Rechtsanwälte, Münster, with an
                                                                      address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of
                                                                      Dupong & Associés, 14a Rue des Bains .
The applicant claims that the Court should :
                                                                      The applicant claims that the Court should :
— declare the application admissible,                                 ( 1 ) order the defendants jointly and severally to pay to the
                                                                             applicant milk quota compensation ( SLOM-III ) for the
                                                                             period from 2 April 1984 to 29 July 1993 , amounting
                                                                             to DM 41 078,16 , together with 8% interest from
— declare the implied refusal by the Commission to lift the
                                                                              19 May 1992 , and to pay the costs of the
     ban on the applicant's entering the Commission 's
     buildings invalid,                                                      proceedings;
                                                                       ( 2 ) join the present case to Case T-77/93 Hülseberg and
                                                                             Others v. Council and Commission of the EC, which is
— award the applicant an amount of ECU 300 000 for                           currently pending, and likewise stay the proceedings .
     non-material harm suffered,
                                                                       Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
— order the Commission to pay the costs .
                                                                       The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as those
                                                                       in Case T-20/94 .
 Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
 The applicant is an official of the Commission who has
 incured the disciplinary penalty of dismissal ; that penalty          Action brought on 27 October 1995 by Bernard Connolly
 has been challenged before the Court of First Instance and               against the Commission of the European Communities
 the case is still pending. In the present action the applicant                                Case T-203 / 95 )
 seeks a declaration of invalidity with regard to the implied
 refusal by the Commission to allow him entry into its                                           ( 95 /C 351 /33 )
 buildings, although he works as a company representative
 and needs to come to meetings with the competent                                      (Language of the case: French)
 authorities of the Commission . In the applicant's view, the
 Commission's refusal constitutes an abuse of rights and                An action against the Commission of the European
 power, since it imposes a second ancillary punishment for              Communities was brought before the Court of First
 which no provision is made in the Staff Regulations of                 Instance of the European Communities on 27 October 1995
 officials . Furthermore, it constitutes a negation of the              by Bernard Connolly, residing at Everberg ( Belgium ),
 constitutional right to freedom of communication and free              represented by Jacques Sambon and Pierre-Paul van
 development of the personality . The applicant also claims             Gehuchten, of the Brussels Bar, with an address for service
 payment of financial compensation for the non-material                 in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Louis Schiltz, 2 Rue du
  harm that he has suffered and is suffering as a result of the         Fort Rheinsheim .
  Commission 's conduct .
                                                                        The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                         — annul the decisions of 6 and 27 September 1995 and
                                                                             4 October 1995 ,