CELEX: C2004/035/26
Language: en
Date: 2004-02-07 00:00:00
Title: Case T-401/03: Action brought on 12 December by Deirdre McCabe against the Commission of the European Communities

C 35/16                 EN                         Official Journal of the European Union                                         7.2.2004
Action brought on 8 December 2003 by Sophie Bachotet                       —     Breach of the duty to state reasons and a manifest error
  against the Commission of the European Communities                             of assessment.
                          (Case T-400/03)                                  (1) Not yet published in the ECR.
                           (2004/C 35/25)
                    (Language of the case: French)
                                                                           Action brought on 12 December by Deirdre McCabe
                                                                             against the Commission of the European Communities
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-                                            (Case T-401/03)
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 8 December 2003 by Sophie                                                     (2004/C 35/26)
Bachotet, residing in Brussels, represented by Sébastien Orlan-
di, Albert Coolen, Jean-Noël Louis and Étienne Marchal,
lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg.                                           (Language of the case: French)
The applicant claims that the Court should:                                An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
                                                                           ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
—     Annul the decision of the Research selection committee               European Communities on 12 December 2003 by Deirdre
      in COM/R/A/01/1999 not to include the name of the                    McCabe, residing in Mondorf-Les-Bains (Luxembourg), rep-
      applicant on the reserve list;                                       resented by Mario Spandre, lawyer.
—     Order the defendant to pay the costs.                                The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                           —     Annul the decision to dismiss Mrs McCabe;
                                                                           —     Order the Commission of the European Communities to
Pleas in law and main arguments                                                  pay compensation for wrongful dismissal;
                                                                           —     Order the Commission of the European Communities to
Following the judgment of the Court of First Instance of                         pay all the expenses and costs.
24 September 2002 in Case T-182/01 (1), annulling the
decision of the selection board not to enter the applicant’s
name on the reserve list resulting from selection procedure
COM/R/A/01/1999 held in order to create a reserve list of                  Pleas in law and main arguments
temporary agents, the applicant was invited to another oral
test. The applicant contests the final decision not to enter her
name on the list of suitable candidates following that second              The applicant, a former probationary official at Eurostat,
oral test.                                                                 contests the decision of the appointing authority not to
                                                                           establish her at the end of her probationary period.
In support of her claims the applicant relies on the following             In support of her claims, she submits that her dismissal was
pleas:                                                                     manifestly wrongful and, therefore, contrary to Article 34(3)
                                                                           of the Staff Regulations. She claims in that connection that her
                                                                           incompetence was alleged merely to prevent her from
—     Breach of Article 233 EC, in so far as the selection board
                                                                           reporting anomalies in the management of Eurostat which
      organised the oral test without taking account of the
                                                                           were revealed subsequently.
      grounds and the operative part of the above judgment of
      the Court of First Instance of 24 September 2002;
                                                                           The decision to dismiss her is based on the various intermediate
—     Breach of the principle of equal treatment for candidates,           probationary reports drawn up on her over 18 months and, in
      in so far as the selection board did not establish, before           particular, on the final report at the end of her probationary
      the oral test, the criteria necessary to enable it to make an        period. The grounds stated in that report were cursory, vague
      assessment, more than two years after the first tests were           and ambiguous and based on allegations wholly without
      held, of the comparative merits of the applicant and the             substance.
      successful candidates placed on the reserve list bearing in
      mind the principle of equal treatment;