CELEX: C1996/016/39
Language: en
Date: 1996-01-20 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 4 December 1995 by Christophe Gimenez against the Committee of the Regions (Case T-220/95)

20 . 1 . 96           EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                  No C 16/17
Action brought on 28 November 1995 by Ana Maria Moles               As her final plea in support of her application for the
Garria-Ortuzar against the Commission of the European               annulment of the contested decision, the applicant points
                          Communities                               out that there has been a misuse of powers in the present
                       ( Case T-216/95 )                            case, based on the fact that the excessive difficulty of the
                                                                    tests resulted from a wish on the part of the administration
                           96/C 16/37 )
                                                                    not to fill the available posts.
                                                                    The objection of illegality raised against the notice of
               (Language of the case: French)                       competition is based on an alleged infringement of Article
                                                                    1 ( 1 ) ( e ) of Annex III to the Staff Regulations.
An action against the Commission of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First
Instance of the European Communities on 28 November
1995 by Ana Maria Moles Garcia-Ortuzar, residing in
Brussels, represented by Marc-Albert Lucas, of the Liège
Bar .                                                               Action brought on 28 November 1995 by Lucia Passera
                                                                      against the Commission of the European Communities
                                                                                             ( Case T-217/95 )
The applicant claims that the Court should:                                                     ( 96/C 16/38 )
— annul the decision of the competition selection board                               (Language of the case: French)
    not to admit her to the list of successful candidates,
                                                                    An action against the Commission of the European
— annul the notice of internal competition COM/B/9/93               Communities was brought before the Court of First
    based on tests,                                                 Instance of the European Communities on 28 November
                                                                    1995 by Lucia Passera, residing at Overijse ( Belgium),
— order the Commission to pay the costs .                           represented by Marc-Albert Lucas, of the Liège Bar.
                                                                    The applicant claims that the Court should :
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
                                                                    — annul the decision of the competition selection board
                                                                         not to admit her to the list of successful candidates,
The applicant, an official of the Commission in grade CI ,
contests both the decision of the selection board in internal
                                                                    — annul the notice of internal competition COM/B/9/93
competition COM/B/9/93 based on tests to exclude her                     based on tests,
from the list of successful candidates and, by way of
objection of illegality, the notice of competition itself.
                                                                    — order the Commission to pay the costs .
She pleads, first, a breach of the obligation to provide a          Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
statement of reasons, in that the contested decision fails to
mention either the assessment criteria adopted or the way in        The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as those
which those criteria were applied to her. Moreover, the             in Case T-216/95 .
Court should find that the notice of competition has not
been complied with and that the purpose of the tests has not
been observed, inasmuch as, first, the candidates were asked
questions during the oral interview which bore no relation
to those which they were legitimately entitled to expect, and,
second, those questions had no direct bearing on the
functions to be fulfilled or the applicant's ability to perform     Action brought on 4 December 1995 by Christophe
them.                                                                       Gimenez against the Committee of the Regions
                                                                                             ( Case T-220/95 )
According to the applicant, the Commission also acted                                           ( 96/C 16/39 )
contrary to the nature of the competition in issue, since the
interviews held by the selection board were based in                                  (Language of the case: French)
particular on the candidates' personal files, whereas the
competition was supposed to have been organized solely on
the basis of tests .                                                An action against the Committee of the Regions was
                                                                    brought before the Court of First Instance of the European
                                                                    Communities on 4 December 1995 by Christophe Gimenez,
Furthermore, the fact that the applicant, who holds a               residing in Brussels, represented by Eric Boigelot, of the
university qualification and has been awarded high marks in         Brussels Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg
her staff reports, was not included amongst the successful          at the Chambers of Louis Schiltz, 2 Rue du Fort
candidates demonstrates a manifest error of assessment .            Rheinsheim .
 ---pagebreak--- No C 16/ 18             EN               Official Journal of the European Communities                                    20 . 1 . 96
The applicant claims that the Court should:                         staff to fill permanent posts on the basis of contracts of one
— annul the decision of the selection board in internal
                                                                    year's duration, without any prior selection; ( b ) the
                                                                    organization of ' bogus' internal competitions leading to
    competition CdR-A/03/95 rejecting the application of            establishment within the shortest period possible; and ( c )
    the applicant,                                                  the establishment of all staff members recruited by the
— annul          the    notice   of   internal    competition       Committee of the Regions, and of those staff members
    CdR-A/03/95 ,                                                   alone . He states that that manner of proceeding manifestly
                                                                    disregards the letter and spirit of the Staff Regulations of
— annul the appointment of the members of the selection             officials, as well as the general principles governing the way
    board in internal competition CdR-A/03/95 ,                     in which any public administration should operate in
                                                                    recruitment matters .
— alternatively, in the event that the first two heads of
    claim are rejected, order the adoption of all such interim
    or definitive measures as may be necessary for the              The applicant further considers that the decision rejecting
    suspension or abeyance of the recruitment procedure             his application necessarily implies , first, infringement of
    currently pending,                                              Article 27 of the Staff Regulations and, second,
                                                                    infringement of the provisions of Protocol No 16 annexed to
— order the defendant to pay the costs.                             the Treaty on European Union, in the light of the principle of
                                                                    equality of treatment, inasmuch as he works for the same
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                 common organizational structure as the members of the
The applicant states that he entered the service of the             temporary staff admitted to the competition. The contested
Economic and Social Committee as a member of the                    decision is also vitiated by a manifest error of
                                                                    assessment .
temporary staff on 3 March 1993 and that, in consequence
of the entry into force of the Treaty on European Union, he
was assigned to a post in the service of the common                 As regards the notice of competition, the applicant
organizational structure of the Economic and Social                 maintains that it does not fulfil the conditions laid down by
Committee and the Committee of the Regions. On                      Article 1 of Annex III to the Staff Regulations and is
30 October 1995 he was informed by a staff notice, a copy           consequently illegal . The notice will also be contrary to
of which was sent to him, of the organization of internal           Protocol No 16 to the Treaty on European Union if it is
competition CdR-A/03/95 to constitute a reserve for future          possible to infer from its provisions that applications
recruitment of administrators/assistant administrators; that        submitted by certain members of the temporary staff
competition was open to the staff of the common                     working for the common organizational structure can be
organizational structure. The applicant submitted his               rejected by reason of the fact that the powers conferred on
                                                                    the appointing authority are exercised, in relation to them,
application by note dated 16 November 1995 . On
27 November 1995 he was informed that the selection                 by the Economic and Social Committee .
board had decided not to admit him to the competition,
since it considered that he did not fulfil the condition of         Lastly, the applicant pleads the illegality of the decisions
membership of the staff of the common organizational                appointing the members of the selection board, in that, first,
                                                                    the Staff Committee of the Economic and Social Committee
structure laid down by the notice of competition.
                                                                    was not involved in the' procedure for appointing the
The applicant maintains that that decision forms part of a          selection board, contrary to the first paragraph of Article 3
general strategy developed by the Committee of the Regions          of Annex III to the Staff Regulations, and, second, the
in order to be able to recruit without difficulty persons           members of the selection board were appointed from
having 'contacts' amongst the representatives of the regions.       amongst persons who entered the service of the Committee
According to the applicant, that recruitment process                of the Regions pursuant to a recruitment policy which was
involves : ( a ) the recruitment of members of the temporary        itself illegal .