CELEX: C1998/397/66
Language: en
Date: 1998-12-19 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 30 October 1998 by Elizabeth Cotrim against the European Centre for Development of Vocational Training (CEDEFOP) (Case T-180/98)

C 397/34             EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                  19.12.98
Ð the putting in order, without delay, of the Justus                     corresponding to two thirds of the installation
    Lipsius Building so that it conforms with the                        allowance paid upon her entry into service;
    requirements of the Community and Belgian laws and
    regulations;
                                                                    Ð order the defendant to pay the costs.
Ð the adoption of effective information and training                Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
    measures for staff with respect to safety.
                                                                    On 1 April 1997 the applicant entered in the service of
That request was expressly rejected by a decision of                CEDEFOP, pursuant to a contract of two years' duration,
12 January 1998.                                                    as a member of its temporary staff, in order to work as a
                                                                    grade C 5 secretary. She was paid an installation
The applicant point out that the Council is obliged, as             allowance pursuant to Article 24(1) of the Conditions of
employer, to guarantee the safety, health and quality of            employment of other servants of the European
environment of its officials at their place of work.                Communities.
In support of their action, the applicants rely on a single         By letter of 28 January 1998, the Commission offered her
plea in law, alleging breach of the duty of care and                a position as a typist in DG XI. Having accepted that
assistance, infringement of the building regulations of the         offer, the applicant gave to the defendant, by note dated
Brussels conurbation, infringement of the rules on safety,          31 January 1998, notice of her intention to terminate her
protection of health and quality of the environment at              employment, in accordance with Article 8 of her contract.
places of work, and manifest error of assessment.                   The two-month period covered by that notice commenced
                                                                    on 1 February 1998 and ended on 31 March 1998. The
                                                                    applicant took up her duties in DG XI on 1 April 1998.
                                                                    In support of her case, the applicant maintains that she
                                                                    has worked without interruption in the service of the
                                                                    Communities since 1 April 1997. She claims that, by
                                                                    deciding to proceed to recover two thirds of the
Action brought on 30 October 1998 by Elizabeth Cotrim               installation allowance paid upon her entry into service, the
against the European Centre for Development of                      defendant has infringed Article 5(5) of Annex VII of the
              Vocational Training (CEDEFOP)                         Staff Rergulations. In taking the view that, by moving
                      (Case T-180/98)                               from CEDEFOP to the Commission, the applicant had
                       (98/C 397/66)                                voluntarily left the service of the Communities, the
                                                                    defendant committed a manifest error of assessment,
               (Language of the case: French)                       having regard to its legal status and to the task assigned
                                                                    to it.
An action against the European Centre for Development
                                                                    The applicant considers that the retention by the
of Vocational Training (CEDEFOP) was brought before
                                                                    Commission of two thirds of the installation allowance
the Court of First Instance of the European Communities
                                                                    paid to her is contrarty to Article 85 of the Staff
on 30 October 1998 by Elizabeth Cotrim, residing at
                                                                    Regulations, having regard to the defendant's standard
Winkelse (Belgium), represented by Jean-NoeÈl Louis and
                                                                    practice, agreed with the Commission, of paying the
FrancËoise Permentier, of the Brussels Bar, with an address
                                                                    whole of the installation allowance to its staff upon their
for service in Luxembourg at the Offices of Fiduciaire
                                                                    recruitment.
Myson SARL, 30 Rue de Cessange.
                                                                    In the alternative, the applicant maintains that, according
The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                    to Article 5(5) of Annex VII of the Staff Regulations, the
                                                                    defendant has acted unlawfully in                demanding
Ð annul CEDEFOP's decision of 9 March 1998 requiring                reimbursement of over half of the installation allowance
    the applicant to repay the sum of BEF 50 102,                   paid to her.