CELEX: C1997/387/42
Language: en
Date: 1997-12-20 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 16 October 1997 by Pierre Richard against the European Parliament (Case T-273/97)

C 387/22              EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                        20 . 12 . 97
the European Communities on 13 October 1997 by                       bringing about conversion of European agriculture to
Azienda Agricola Tre e Mezzo, represented by Carlo                   farming of a kind which uses everdecreasing quantities of
Piccoli and Fabrizio Fabbri, of the Forli Bar ( Cesena ), and        plant-protection products and to that end a large
Francois Turk, of the Luxembourg Bar, with an address                proportion of the aid in the industry is directed towards
for service in Luxembourg at the latter's Chambers, 13A              organic farming — but by adopting the contested
Avenue Guillaume .                                                   regulation, the defendant made a sudden change of
                                                                     direction, pursuing aims different from those declared
                                                                     earlier, so that more difficulties and problems are
The applicant claims that the Court should :                         encountered in implementing organic methods owing to
                                                                     the reduction of the technical resources available to
                                                                     farmers who are adopting or wish to adopt such methods .
— declare that the applicant has locus standi as such,
                                                                     (') Commission Regulation ( EC ) No 1488/97 of 29 July 1997
                                                                           amending Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 2092/91 on organic
— annul Commission Regulation ( EC ) No 1488/97 of                         production of agricultural products and indications referring
                                                                           thereto on agricultural products and foodstuffs ( OJ L 202 ,
     29 July 1997 published in Official Journal of the                     30 . 7 . 1997, p. 12 ).
     European Communities L 202 of 30 July 1997, p. 12 ,             ( 2 ) OJ L 198 , 22 . 7 . 1991 , p . 1 .
     in so far as it does not include, in the new wording of         (') Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 2078/92 of 30 June 1992 on
     Annex lib of Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 2092/91 ,                  agricultural production methods compatible with the
     the following plant-health products : preparations from               requirements of the protection of the environment and the
     Ryania speciosa, propolis, diatomaceous earth, stone                  maintenance of the countryside ( OJ L 215, 30. 7. 1992, p. 85 ).
     meal , Bordeaux mixture, Burgundy mixture , sodium
     silicate, sodium bicarbonate , and plant and animal
     oils,
— order the European Commission to pay the costs .
                                                                     Action brought on 16 October 1997 by Pierre Richard
                                                                                        against the European Parliament
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                                                ( Case T-273/97 )
                                                                                                     ( 97/C 387/42 )
The applicant, a company producing organic products and
duly accredited as such by one of the eight certificatory                                 {Language of the case: French)
authorities recognized by the Italian State, opposes the
removal by the contested regulation (') of certain plant­
health products from the list of those allowed in organic            An action against the European Parliament was brought
agriculture .                                                        before the Court of First Instance of the European
                                                                     Communities on 16 October 1997 by Pierre Richard, of
                                                                     Luxembourg, represented by Andre Lutgen, of the
In support of its claims, the applicant alleges, first,              Luxembourg Bar, with an address for service in
infringement of the last indent of Article 155 of the EC             Luxembourg at his Chambers, 1 , Rue Jean-Pierre Brasseur.
Treaty, which provides that the powers conferred on the
Commission by the Council are to be exercised for the
implementation of the rules laid down by the Council .               The applicant claims that the Court should :
The applicant considers that Council Regulation No 2092/
91 ( 2 ) was designed to favour and promote the
development and expansion of organic production                      — annul the decision of the appointing authority
methods, by regulating that activity and providing                          rejecting the applicant's application for the post
incentives in the form of contributions and financing. In                   advertised by Notice of Vacancy No 8011 ,
actual fact, the wording of Annex lib, and all the products
included in it, resulted from a precise choice which
mentioned specified products rather than others,                     — annul the decision to appoint the successful Swedish
regardless of whether or not their use had been authorized                  candidate,
by individual Member States . The Commission's decision
to exclude from the list of permitted products the new
plant-protection products mentioned above , solely by                — annul the decision taken by the Bureau, at its meeting
reference to the criterion of lack of ' authorization or use '              of 17 July 1997, to reject the applicant's complaint
is therefore open to criticism .                                            against that decision,
The applicant also alleges misuse of powers, in that the             — take formal notice that he reserves the right to claim
Council, by Regulation No 2078/92 ('), introduced                           compensation, as and when appropriate, for the
agricultural and environmental measures capable of                          material and non-material damage suffered.
 ---pagebreak--- 20 . 12 . 97            EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                     C 387/23
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                   Action brought on 16 October 1997 by Societa Ca'
                                                                      Pasta s.r.l . against the Commission of the European
                                                                                                 Communities
The applicant, an official in Grade A 4, takes issue with
the appointing authority's refusal to promote him to                                          ( Case T-274/97 )
Grade A 3 , rejecting his application for the post advertised                                   ( 97/C 387/43 )
in Notice of Vacancy No 8011 . A Swedish woman who
passed an open competition and was placed third on the
reserve list was appointed in his place .                                              (Language of the case: Italian)
The applicant puts forward the following pleas in support             An action against the Commission of the European
of his claims :
                                                                      Communities was brought before the Court of First
                                                                      Instance on 16 October 1997 by Societa Ca ' Pasta s.r.l .,
— infringement of Article 29 ( 1 ) of the Staff Regulations,          represented by Paolo Piva , of the Venice Bar, and Guy
     in that, in contravention of that provision , the                Arendt, of the Luxembourg Bar, with an address for
     appointing authority opened the external recruitment             service in Luxembourg at the latter's chambers, 62 Avenue
                                                                      Guillaume .
     procedure without first considering the possibility of
     filling the vacant post through the various internal
     recruitment procedures . The different selection criteria
     by which the appointing authority is bound under                 The applicant claims that the Court of First Instance
     Articles 7 and 27 of the Staff Regulations make it               should annul the measure in the form of a letter of reply
     impossible to compare directly internal applications             dated 4 August 1997 ( File No 11423 ) from Directorate
     with external applications in that the appointing                General XIV ( Fisheries ) relating to ' Project IT/ 166/91 —
     authority's decisions on promotion and transfer must             Your letter of 21 July 1997'.
     be based on the interest of the service while
     recruitment must be on the basis of the criteria of
     ' ability, efficiency and integrity, ... on the broadest         Contentions and principal arguments adduced in support:
     possible geographical basis',
                                                                      This action derives from the grant of aid to the applicant
— breach of the obligation to state reasons under                     in connection with structural incentives for the fisheries
     Article 25 of the Staff Regulations,                             and agricultural sector. With a view to implementation of
                                                                      a project for modernization of an aquaculture unit in
                                                                      Contarina ( Veneto ), the applicant sought and obtained a
— infringement of Article 7 of the Staff Regulations in               Community contribution of Lit 942 300 004, equal to
     that the applicant's candidature was rejected and the            40 % of the approved cost. Following an administrative
     candidate ultimately chosen was appointed not on the             check, involving Commission representatives, it was noted
     basis of the criterion of the interest of the service but        that the business had been transferred without the prior
     of considerations relating to the nationality of the             authorization considered necessary under Article 24 of
     candidates in question,                                          Regulation No 4253/88 ('). After completing the
                                                                      procedure provided for in Article 44 of Regulation
                                                                      No 4028/86 (-), the head of Directorate General XIV
— existence, in this case, of a manifest error of                     issued the contested measure, confirming 'continuation of
     assessment and failure to take account of the selection
                                                                      the internal procedure with a view to cancelling the
     criteria published in the Notice of Vacancy, in that, as         contribution and recovering the amount already paid '.
     regards the specifications set out in that notice,
     external candidates inevitably did not have knowledge
     of the specific nature of the Parliament's departments           In support of its claims, the applicant relies on the
     or of the practical operation of internal administrative         following pleas in law:
     procedures or rules,
                                                                      — breach of essential procedural requirements, in that
— the decision complained of is contrary to the interest                  the principle of collegiality was not observed in
     of the service in that, despite the applicant's                      relation to the adoption of the contested measure;
     experience, the post in question was not satisfactorily
      filled,
                                                                      — inappropriate investigation, lack of a statement of
— the contested decision was made on the basis of data                     reasons and misuse of powers . According to the
     which were manifestly not comparable, in that the                     applicant, there was a clear distortion of the facts
      successful candidate chosen was on a reserve list while              owing essentially to an improper and inadequate
     the applicant's qualifications were of necessity assessed             investigation, the purpose of which was to check
                                                                           whether there had been a transfer of the business
      on the basis of his staff reports .
                                                                           without prior authorization from the Commission and
                                                                           the Italian Government ( the described as 'a significant
                                                                           alteration ') rather than , possibly, consistent use of the