CELEX: C1996/180/88
Language: en
Date: 1996-06-22 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 22 April 1996 by Alberto Maccaferri against the Commission of the European Communities (Case T-56/96)

22 . 6 . 96           EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                               No C 180/37
Action brought on 22 April 1996 by Alberto Maccaferri                was the subject of the recruitment procedure in question for
  against the Commission of the European Communities                 a post of temporary staff member at grade B 1 in another
                        ( Case T-56/96 )                             directorate general, and that neither the applicant nor the
                                                                     other successful candidates were informed of the exchange
                          ( 96/C 180/88 )
                                                                     or given clear, precise and complete reasons justifying it. The
                                                                     applicant states that in so far as the appointing authority
               (Language of the case: French)                        organized the said selection procedure with a view to filling
                                                                     a specific grade A5/A4 post in DG XXIII, the defendant
                                                                     institution breached the rules for filling vacant posts by
An action against the Commission of the European                     derogating in the present case from the rule requiring it to do
Communities was brought before the Court of First                    so by appointing a candidate whose name is on the list of
Instance of the European Communities on 22 April 1 996 by            suitable candidates drawn up by the selection board;
Alberto Maccaferri, of Bologna ( Italy ), represented by
Jean-Noël Louis, Thierry Demaseure and Ariane Tornel, of             misuse of powers, in that it is apparent, according to the
the Brussels Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg          applicant, that the real motive for the exchange of posts at
at the office of Fiduciaire Myson, 1 Rue Glesener .                  issue was the recruitment as a temporary staff member at
                                                                     grade B 1 of a candidate chosen in advance, although the
                                                                     requirements of the service compelled the Commission to
The applicant claims that the Court should :                         conclude a contact for services with a private undertaking in
                                                                     order for the applicant to be made available to it,
— annul the decision not to appoint the applicant to the
     post which was the subject of selection procedure               breach of the principle of the protection of legitimate
     62T/XXIII/93 with a view to filling the post of A4/5            expectations. Both the applicant and the other successful
     temporary staff member in Directorate-General XXIII             candidates in selection procedure 62T/XXIII/93 could
     — ' Enterprise Policy, Distributive Trades, Tourism and         legitimately expect the post which was the subject of
     Cooperatives ', sector for implementation of                    competition to be filled by the recruitment of one of
     administrative simplification in the Community,                 them .
— annul the decision to transfer the budgeted post of a
     temporary staff member at level A4/5 from DG XXIII to
     another directorate general and to replace it with the
     budgeted post of a temporary staff member at level
     B,
                                                                     Action brought on 22 April 1996 by Livio Costantini
— order the defendant to pay the costs .                                 against Commission of the European Communities
                                                                                              ( Case T-57/96 )
Pleas in law and main arguments:                                                                ( 96/C 180/89 )
The applicant challenges the Commission's decision not to                            (Language of the case: Italian)
appoint him to an A5/A4 post in DG XXIII which was the
subject of selection procedure 62T/XXIII/93 despite his
having been included on the list of successful candidates . By       An action against the Commission of the European
a note from the Director of Directorate B, ' Community               Communities was brought before the Court of First
action to assist enterprises', the Director-General of               Instance on 22 April 1996 by Livio Costantini, an official in
DG XXIII was asked to 'take the appropriate steps' for him           the Commissions' scientific and technical services, working
to be recruited as quickly as possible . Nothing came of that        at the International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna,
request .                                                            represented by Giuseppe Marchesini, Avvocato with right of
                                                                     appearance before the Corte di Cassazione of the Italian
                                                                     Republic , with an address for service in Luxembourg at the
The applicant observes that he entered the service of the            chambers of Ernest Arendt, 8— 10 Rue Mathias Hardt.
 Commission in 1993 as a member of the auxiliary staff, and
that when his contract as an auxiliary staff member expired
he was recruited by a private company in order to be made            The applicant claims that the Court should :
 available to DG XXIII of the Commission to perform the
work he did as a member of the auxiliary staff.
                                                                     — annul the refusal to pay him the installation allowance
                                                                         and daily subsistence allowance,
The applicant puts forward the following pleas in law in
 support of his application :                                        — declare that the Commission is required to pay him the
                                                                         sums payable under Articles 5 and 10 of Annex VII to
 breach of the rules for filling vacant posts and of the duty to         the Staff Regulations or such sums as may be arrived at
state reasons. In the procedure at issue it is apparent that the         by recalculation of his allowances in accordance with
 appointing authority exchanged the budgeted post which                  Article 38 of the Staff Regulations,