CELEX: C2002/247/37
Language: en
Date: 2002-10-12 00:00:00
Title: Case T-243/02: Action brought on 12 August 2002 by J against Commission of the European Communities

12.10.2002            EN                       Official Journal of the European Communities                                       C 247/23
The applicant claims that the Court should:                               Pleas in law and main arguments
—     annul the decision of the Commission not to include the
      applicant’s name in the list of officials most deserving of         By decision of 23 July 2001, the Commission department to
      promotion to Grade B 2 and the decision not to promote              which the applicant is posted requested that proceedings be
      him to that grade in the 2001 promotions procedure;                 initiated to recommence other proceedings allegedly initiated
                                                                          previously for a finding of professional incompetence of the
—     order the defendant to pay the costs.                               applicant. According to the applicant, the Director General of
                                                                          DG ADMIN interpreted that request as a request to ‘initiate
                                                                          proceedings under Article 51 of the Staff Regulations’.
Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                          The applicant claims that the documents on which his
                                                                          department based its request show the imprecise way in which
The applicant in the present case, an official at Grade B 3               it is handling the file. The file in no way demonstrates that the
working for the defendant, challenges the appointing auth-                proceedings referred to were initiated in 1994 and 1996.
ority’s refusal to promote him to Grade B 2 in the context of
the 2001 promotions procedure.
                                                                          In support of his application, the applicant alleges:
In support of his arguments, the applicant alleges infringement
                                                                          —      lack of precision as regards the reopening of former
of Article 45 of the Staff Regulations and breach of the                         proceedings under Article 51 of the Staff Regulations or
principles of equal treatment, that officials should have
                                                                                 the opening of new proceedings, without setting out the
reasonable career prospects and of the principle of sound
                                                                                 applicant’s conduct complained of;
administration.
                                                                          —      infringement of the rule audi alteram partem;
                                                                          —      infringement of the principle non bis in idem;
                                                                          —      breach of the principle that legitimate expectations are to
Action brought on 12 August 2002 by J against Com-                               be protected;
            mission of the European Communities
                                                                          —      breach of the principle of proportionality;
                        (Case T-243/02)                                   —      error of assessment of the facts and misuse of powers;
                        (2002/C 247/37)                                   —      lack of statement of reasons;
                   (Language of the case: French)                         —      infringement of Article 26 of the Staff Regulations.
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 12 August 2002 by J, represented
by Juan Ramón Iturriagagoitia Bassas, lawyer.
                                                                          Action brought on 9 August 2002 by G.D. Searle LLC
                                                                          (formerly known as G.D. Searle & Co) against the Office
The applicant claims that the Court should:                               for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks
                                                                                                      and Designs)
—     annul the decision of the appointing authority of 14 Feb-
      ruary 2002 rejecting the applicant’s complaint of                                             (Case T-244/02)
      29 December 2001;
—     annul the decision of 23 July 2001 asking DG ADMIN ‘to                                        (2002/C 247/38)
      initiate proceedings for a finding of repeated professional
      shortcomings as soon as possible’;                                                      (Language of the case: English)
—     annul the decision of 19 September 2001 concerning the
      initiation of proceedings under Article 51 of the Staff
      Regulations;                                                        An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
                                                                          Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the
—     award damages to the applicant for the non-material                 Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
      damage suffered by him, amounting to EUR 25 000;                    9 August 2002 by G.D. Searle LLC (formerly known as
                                                                          G.D. Searle & Co), represented by Graham Farrington, Farring-
—     order the defendant to pay the costs.                               ton & Co Solicitors, Reading (UK).