CELEX: C2004/059/48
Language: en
Date: 2004-03-06 00:00:00
Title: Case T-437/03: Action brought on 26 December 2003 by Anne-Marie Mathieu against the Commission of the European Communities

C 59/30               EN                          Official Journal of the European Union                                              6.3.2004
The applicant claims that the Court should:                                      the applicant any additional seniority and therefore
                                                                                 reclassified her in Grade C 4, first step, instead of
—     Declare that the Commission was under a duty to define                     Grade C 4, third step;
      its position in respect of that part of Gibtelecom’s
      complaint concerning an infringement of Article 86 (1)
      EC in conjunction with Article 12 and/or Article 49 EC;
                                                                          —      In so far as necessary, annul the express decision of the
—     Declare that the Commission, by not defining its position                  appointing authority of 11 September 2003, notified
      within two months of Gibtelecom’s letter of formal notice                  to the applicant on 16 September 2003, dismissing
      of 18 August 2003, in respect of that part of its complaint                complaint No R/222/03;
      concerning an infringement of Article 86 (1) EC in
      conjunction with Article 12 and/or Article 49 EC, failed
      to act;
                                                                          —      Order the defendant to pay all the costs of the proceed-
—     Call upon the Commission to act by adopting a decision                     ings.
      on that part of Gibtelecom’s complaint concerning an
      infringement of Article 86 (1) EC in conjunction with
      Article 12 and/or Article 49 EC;
—     Order the Commission to pay Gibtelecom’s costs;
—     Alternatively, annul the Commission’s decision of
      17 October 2003 (Reference No D005602) rejecting that
      part of Gibtelecom’s complaint concerning an infringe-              Pleas in law and main arguments
      ment of Article 86 (1) EC in conjunction with Article 12
      and/or Article 49 EC;
—     Order the Commission to pay Gibtelecom’s costs.
                                                                          Following the judgment of the Court of First Instance in Case
                                                                          T-17/95 (1), the Commission adopted an amendment of the
Pleas in law and main arguments                                           rules relating to the criteria applicable to appointment in grade
                                                                          and classification in scale on recruitment, which entitled
The pleas and arguments invoked by the applicant are similar              officials to seek a review of their classification on entering the
to those invoked by the same applicant in case T-433/03.                  service. By the contested decision, the Commission granted
                                                                          such a request submitted by the applicant and reclassified her
                                                                          in Grade C 4, Step 1. The applicant is contesting that decision,
                                                                          in so far as it does not award her any additional seniority.
Action brought on 26 December 2003 by Anne-Marie
     Mathieu against the Commission of the European
                          Communities                                     In support of her action, the applicant relies on a breach of the
                                                                          Commission’s decisions of 6 June 1973 and 1 September
                                                                          1983 on the criteria applicable to appointment in grade and
                        (Case T-437/03)
                                                                          classification in step on recruitment. She also claims that the
                                                                          Commission has infringed Article 5(3) of the Staff Regulations
                         (2004/C 59/48)                                   and the principle of equal treatment by refusing to award her
                                                                          any additional seniority although it awarded the maximum
                   (Language of the case: French)                         additional seniority to other officials whose professional
                                                                          experience is much shorter than hers. Last, the applicant relies
                                                                          on a failure to state reasons in the contested decision.
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 26 December 2003 by Anne-Marie
Mathieu, residing in Kraainem (Belgium), represented by
Nicolas Lhoëst, lawyer, with an address for service in Luxem-             (1) Judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European Communi-
                                                                              ties of 5 October 1995, published in OJ C 315, 25.11.95, p. 14.
bourg.
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—     Annul the decision of the appointing authority dated
      20 December 2003 in so far as it did not award