CELEX: C1997/166/47
Language: en
Date: 1997-05-31 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 4 April 1997 by G. Van Dyck against the Commission of the European Communities (Case T-87/97)

31 . 5 . 97            EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                              No C 166/23
Instance of the European Communities on 3 April 1997                 Action brought on 4 April 1997 by G. Van Dyck against
by Horeca-Wallonie, whose registered office is at Namur                     the Commission of the European Communities
( Belgium ), represented by Gilles Bouneou, of the                                           ( Case T-87/97)
Luxembourg Bar, and by Jean Materne and Alain Bernard,
                                                                                               ( 97/C 166/47)
of the Liege Bar ( Belgium ), with an address for service in
Luxembourg at the Chambers of Gilles Bouneou, 15                                     (Language of the case: Dutch)
Avenue du Bois .
                                                                     An action against the Commission of European
                                                                     Communities was brought before the Court of First
The applicant claims that the Court should:                          Instance of the European Communities on 4 April 1997
                                                                     by G. Van Dyck, residing in Wuustwezel ( Belgium ),
                                                                     represented by G. Vandersanden and M.-A. Marx, of the
— annul the decision of the Commission of the European               Brussels Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at
     Union contained in the letter of 24 September 1996              the offices of Fiduciaire Myson Sari, 30 Rue de Cessange .
     addressed to the Belgian State as represented by its
     Minister for Foreign Affairs,                                   The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                     — declare the present application admissible and well­
                                                                         founded,
— order the Commission to pay the costs.
                                                                     — consequently, annul the decision of the appointing
                                                                         authority of 21 June 1996 refusing to reconsider the
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                      applicant's grading in accordance with Article 31 ( 2 )
                                                                         of the Staff Regulations and, in so far as may be
                                                                         necessary, annul the decision of 27 December 1996
The Federation of Flotel, Restaurant and Cafe Proprietors                rejecting the complaint lodged by the applicant on
of Wallonia challenges the Commission's declaration that                 9 September 1996,
a draft decree of the Wallonia Government concerning
social tourism in Wallonia which provides that 'recognized           — order the European Commission to take all
associations' within the meaning of Article 2 thereof may                appropriate steps to comply with the judgment to be
be entitled to subsidies while reserving up to 49 % of the               delivered in the case, so as to provide for the
actual occupation of each hotel to guests who do not fall                applicant's remuneration to be increased retroactively
within the scope of social tourism is compatible with the                and for the payment of default interest at the rate of
common market and its corresponding refusal to initiate                  8 % from the date of the applicant's entry into service,
the procedure provided for in Article 93 (2 ) of the EC
Treaty. The applicant points out in this regard that, in its         — order the Commission to pay all the costs.
present form, the wording of the draft allows social
tourism centres to compete directly and unfairly with                Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
private sector undertakings.
                                                                     — Infringement of Article 31 (2 ) of the Staff Regulations
                                                                         The Commission failed, when fixing the applicant's
It claims that the figures referred to by the Commission in
                                                                         grade, to take into account the special circumstances
the letter containing the contested decision came solely
                                                                         prevailing — namely, the applicant's training and
from the Wallonia authority and do not correspond to the
facts and are inaccurate .                                               experience — and therefore failed to adopt a grading
                                                                         decision within the meaning of Article 31 ( 2 ) of the
                                                                         Staff Regulations .
The applicant considers that it should be allowed to                 — Breach of the principle of non-discrimination
submit a much more accurate analysis of the level of
planned subsidy, which would be in addition to the                       The Commission failed to observe the principle of
financial and fiscal structural advantages which social                  non-discrimination, in that it took account, when
tourism centres already enjoy as non-profit-making                       appointing members of the temporary staff to
associations .
                                                                         established posts, of the professional experience which
                                                                         those staff members had acquired at the time of their
                                                                         assignment to temporary posts, but failed to have
It therefore requests that the procedure for examining                   regard to the experience and training of probationer
State aid should be initiated on the basis of Article 93 ( 2 )           officials .
of the Treaty so that the interested parties, including the
applicant, can submit observations on the basis of a file            — Breach of the duty to have regard for the welfare and
made available to it and containing relevant information,                interests of officials and of the principle of sound
in particular statistical and financial information .                    administration
                                                                         By replying in French to the complaint lodged in the
                                                                         Dutch language, and by failing to inform the
 ---pagebreak--- No C 166/24            EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                    31 . 5 . 97
    applicant, upon his appointment, of the implications              The applicant claims that the Court should:
    of Article 31 (2 ) of the Staff Regulations, the
    Commission breached the abovementioned principles.                — annul the Commission 's decision of 18 June 1996
                                                                            rejecting the applicant's request that it give
                                                                            consideration to the possible application of Article 31
                                                                             ( 2 ) of the Staff Regulations,
                                                                      — annul, in so far as may be necessary, the decision
Action brought on 7 April 1997 by Henri Jacobs against
                                                                            adopted by the Commission on 27 December 1996
       the Commission of the European Communities
                                                                            expressly rejecting the applicant's complaint,
                         ( Case T-88/97)
                           ( 97/C 166/48                              — order the defendant to pay all the costs.
                (Language of the case: French)
                                                                      Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
An action against the Commission of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First                     The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as in
Instance of the European Communities on 7 April 1997                  Case T- 16/97 ( M.
by Henri Jacobs, residing at Steenokkerzeel ( Belgium ),
represented by Nicolas Lhoest, of the Brussels Bar, with an           O OJ No C 74, 8 . 3 . 1997, p . 27.
address for service in Luxembourg at the offices of
Fiduciaire Myson Sari, 30 Rue de Cessange .
The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                      Action brought on 7 April 1997 by Martine Frix against
— annul the Commission's decision of 20 June 1996                                the Commission of the European Communities
    rejecting the applicant's request that it give
                                                                                                   ( Case T-90/97)
    consideration to the possible application of Article 31
    (2 ) of the Staff Regulations,                                                                  ( 97/C 166/50)
— annul, in so far as may be necessary, the decision                                      (Language of the case: French)
    adopted by the Commission on 27 December 1996
    expressly rejecting the applicant's complaint,                    An action against the Commission of the European
                                                                      Communities was brought before the Court of First
— order the defendant to pay all the costs .                          Instance of the European Communities on 7 April 1997
                                                                      by Martine Frix, residing at Rosieres ( Belgium ),
                                                                      represented by Nicolas Lhoest, of the Brussels Bar, with an
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                   address for service in Luxembourg at the offices of
                                                                      Fiduciaire Myson Sari , 30 Rue de Cessange .
The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as in
Case T- 16/9 7 ( M.                                                   The applicant claims that the Court should :
H OJ No C 74 , 8 . 3 . 1997, p . 27.
                                                                      — annul the Commission's decision of 18 July 1996
                                                                            rejecting the applicant's request that it give
                                                                            consideration to the possible application of Article 31
                                                                             (2 ) of the Staff Regulations,
Action brought on 7 April 1997 by Mikael Barfod against               — annul, in so far as may be necessary, the decision
       the Commission of the European Communities                            adopted by the Commission on 27 December 1996
                         ( Case T-89/97 )                                   expressly rejecting the applicant's complaint,
                             97/C 166/49 )
                                                                      — order the defendant to pay all the costs .
                (Language of the case: French)
                                                                      Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
An action against the Commission of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First                     The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as in
Instance of the European Communities on 7 April 1997                  Case T-l 6/97 (>).
by Mikael Barfod, residing at Rhode-Saint-Genese
(Belgium ), represented by Nicolas Lhoest, of the Brussels            t 1 ) OJ No C 74 , 8 . 3 . 1997, p . 27.
Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the
offices of Fiduciaire Myson Sari, 30 Rue de Cessange.