CELEX: C1999/281/39
Language: en
Date: 1999-10-02 00:00:00
Title: Case T-161/99: Action brought on 8 July 1999 by the company Navigazione Libera del Golfo against the Commission of the European Communities

C 281/20               EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                        2.10.1999
The applicants claim that the Court should:                             Action brought on 8 July 1999 by the company Naviga-
                                                                        zione Libera del Golfo against the Commission of the
— order, by way of measures of inquiry, the production of all                               European Communities
    documents relating to the work done by the selection
    board, including the tests, and the taking of evidence from
    Mr Fischer Holm, Mr Merilla and Mr Welander and the                                          (Case T-161/99)
    other candidates in the competition;
                                                                                                (1999/C 281/39)
— annul all the steps taken in the competition;
— annul the decisions of the selection board in competition
    LA/62 not to admit the applicants to the oral test and not                             (Language of the case: Italian)
    to mark their optional tests;
                                                                        An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
— annul the Council’s decision of 8 April 1999 rejecting the            ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
    administrative complaint lodged by the applicants on                European Communities on 8 July 1999 by the company
    8 December 1998;                                                    Navigazione Libera del Golfo, represented by Salvatore Raven-
                                                                        na and Emiliano Amato, of the Naples and Rome Bars, with
— order the defendant to pay the costs.                                 an address for service in Massalubrense (NA) at the chambers
                                                                        of S. Ravenna, 2 Corso S. Agata.
Pleas in law and main arguments                                         The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                        — declare that the Commission has failed to fulfil its obli-
The applicants, all of whom are Swedish nationals and grade                  gations under Article 93 of the EC Treaty (now Article 88
LA 7 officials of the Council, took part in the Council’s internal           EC) by failing to adopt a decision on the complaint made
competition LA/62 based on tests, which was held with a view                 by the applicant on 20 February 1999 concerning aid
to filling three LA 5 posts of reviser/principal translator                  granted to the undertaking CA.RE.MAR (Napoli) by the
(Swedish mother tongue). By letter of 9 September 1998 the                   Italian Government;
selection board informed the applicants that it had decided not
to admit them to the oral test, on the ground that they had             — order the Commission to bear the applicant’s costs.
not obtained at least 60 % of the maximum marks provided
for by the competition notice in respect of the revision test.
Consequently, the optional tests which they had done were               Pleas in law and main arguments
not marked.
                                                                        The applicant in the present case is a maritime transport
In support of their application, the applicants plead:                  company operating high speed vessels (hydroplanes and
                                                                        catamarans) serving the islands in the Bay of Naples. It
— infringement of Article 3 of Annex III to the Staff Regu-             challenges the system of State aid introduced by Law No 684
    lations and failure to observe the principles of objectivity        of 20 December 1974 in so far as it relates specifically to
    and equality in the assessment of the candidates, first, in         CA.RE.MAR., the only company operating in the Bay of Naples
    that no member of the selection board had a perfect                 which benefits from such aid.
    knowledge of the target language, namely Swedish, and,
    second, in that the members of the selection board did not
    have a perfect command of the source languages, in                  According to the applicant, the subsidies in question are
    particular French and English, alternatively that an insuf-         unlimited and are intended to make up the operating losses
    ficient number of them possessed such a command;                    which the recipient — a public concern — registers every year;
                                                                        the result being that the aid enables the company to escape
— infringement of the essential rules governing the work of             bankruptcy which would otherwise be inevitable. In addition,
    the selection boeard and failure to observe the principle of        the aid in question is operating aid, which is clearly inconsistent
    equal treatment, inasmuch as two assessors lacked a perfect         with the Commission Communication on Community guide-
    command of all the source languages;                                lines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in
                                                                        difficulty (1) and the Community guidelines on State aid to
— infringement of the essential rules governing the work of             maritime transport (2).
    the selection board and failure to observe the principle of
    objectivity in the assessment of candidates, such that the
    assessors, who were colleagues of the applicants, were able         On this point, it is asserted that, between 1992 and 1997, the
    to penetrate the anonymity attaching to the papers;                 amount of aid has averaged something in the region of ITL
                                                                        40 billion, whereas revenue from ticket sales is just a little over
— failure to comply with the competition notice, in that the            50 % of that figure.
    selection board instructed the assessors to allow only a
    limited number of candidates to proceed to take the oral            The applicant submitted its complaint on 20 February 1999.
    test;                                                               Because of the particular urgency of the matter, in the
                                                                        complaint itself the applicant requested the defendant to take
— irregularity in the composition of the selection board.               action within the period of two months laid down in
                                                                        Article 175 of the EC Treaty (now Article 232). Since no
                                                                        decision was adopted within that period, the applicant brought
                                                                        the present action.
 ---pagebreak--- 2.10.1999               EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                      C 281/21
According to the applicant, because of the classic nature of the          the Staff Committee of 22 October 1997 and of paragraph 2
contested aid and the fact that it is clearly operating and rescue        of Article 2 of the General Notice for Election published by
aid, the said period of two months may be considered                      the electoral office on 27 January 1999, inasmuch as 21 per-
reasonable.                                                               sons not qualifying as electors under the applicable rules voted
                                                                          in the contested elections and those votes may have affected
                                                                          the results as regards the allocation of the number of seats on
(1) OJ C 368 of 23.12.94.                                                 the various lists.
(2) OJ C 205 of 5.7.1997.
                                                                          They also plead infringement of the first paragraph of Article 1
                                                                          and Article 4 of Annex II to the Staff Regulations, of the
                                                                          second subparagraph of Article 3(1) and Article 6 of the Rules
                                                                          laying down the composition and operation of the Staff
                                                                          Committee, of Article 14(b) and (c) of the procedure adopted
                                                                          by the general meeting on 19 January 1999 for the election of
                                                                          the Brussels section of the Staff Committee, and of the second
Action brought on 19 July 1999 by Luigia Dricot-Daniele,                  paragraph of Article 2 and the second paragraph of Article 4
Patricia De Palma and Claudine Hamptaux against the                       of the General Notice for Election in that 27 postal votes
         Commission of the European Communities                           arrived out of time because the electors concerned received
                                                                          their ballot papers late.
                          (Case T-162/99)
                                                                          Lastly, the applicants plead infringement of the final paragraph
                          (1999/C 281/40)                                 of Article 14 of the Rules laying down the composition and
                                                                          operation of the Staff Committee and of Article 32 of the
                                                                          internal rules of the Brussels local staff committee of 14 April
                                                                          1990, in that the appointments to the Central Staff Committee
                    (Language of the case: French)                        and to the other organs set up under the Staff Regulations and
                                                                          administrative bodies were made by a local staff committee
An action against the Commission of European Communities                  constituted in accordance with the results of elections which
was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European            were vitiated by irregularities. In the applicants’ view, those
Communities on 19 July 1999 by Luigia Dricot-Daniele,                     irregularities may have altered the distribution of seats as
Patricia De Palma and Claudine Hamptaux, residing in Brussels,            between the different lists, and may consequently have altered
represented by Lucas Vogel, of the Brussels Bar, with an                  the distribution of seats on the Central Staff Committee and in
address for service at the Chambers of Christian Kremer, 6 Rue            the other administrative bodies or organs set up under the
Heinrich Heine.                                                           Staff Regulations appointments to which were to be made by
                                                                          the local staff committee.
The applicants claim that the Court should:
— annul the elections held on 9, 10 and 11 March 1999 to
    the Staff Committee of the local Brussels section and the
    various appointments and proposals for appointments to
    the Central Staff Committee and to the other organs set up
    under the Staff Regulations and administrative bodies                 Action brought on 9 July 1999 by Alain Leroy against the
    made by that committee following those elections;                                     Council of the European Union
— in so far as may be necessary: first, take note of the refusal
    by the Commission to annul the aforementioned elections                                        (Case T-164/99)
    and declare that the Staff Committee of the local Brussels
    section, constituted in accordance with the results of the                                    (1999/C 281/41)
    elections held on 9, 10 and 11 March 1999, as proclaimed
    by the electoral office on 23 March 1999, has not been
    validly constituted and, consequently, that the appoint-                                 (Language of the case: French)
    ments and or proposals for appointments made by that
    committee to the Central Staff Committee and to the                   An action against the Council of the European Union was
    other organs set up under the Staff Regulations and                   brought before the Court of First Instance of the European
    administrative bodies are invalid; and, second, annul the             Communities on 9 July 1999 by Alain Leroy, residing at
    rejection of the complaints lodged by the applicants;                 Grimbergen (Belgium), represented by Georges Vandersanden,
                                                                          of the Brussels Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg
— order the defendant to pay the costs.                                   at the offices of Fiduciaire Myson SARL, 30 Rue de Cessange.
                                                                          The applicant claims that the Court should:
Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                          — acknowledge the illegality of the decision of the Council of
                                                                              1 May 1999 laying down the detailed arrangements for
The applicants plead, first, infringement of the fourth para-                 the integration of the Schengen Secretarial into the General
graph of Article 1 of Annex II to the Staff Regulations of                    Secretariat of the Council, and consequently annul the
officials, of Article 7 of the Conditions of employment of other              same;
servants of the European Communities, of Articles 4(2) and 6
of the Rules laying down the composition and operation of                 — order the defendant to pay the costs.