CELEX: C1999/333/78
Language: en
Date: 1999-11-20 00:00:00
Title: Case T-214/99: Action brought on 28 September 1999 by Manuel Tomás Carrasco Benítez against the Commission of the European Communities

20.11.1999             EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                      C 333/35
Action brought on 24 September 1999 by Luc Verheyden                      Action brought on 28 September 1999 by Manuel Tomás
  against the Commission of the European Communities                      Carrasco Benı́tez against the Commission of the European
                                                                                                   Communities
                         (Case T-213/99)
                                                                                                  (Case T-214/99)
                         (1999/C 333/77)
                                                                                                  (1999/C 333/78)
                    (Language of the case: French)
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-                                    (Language of the case: French)
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 24 September 1999 by Luc Ver-
heyden, residing at Angera (Italy), represented by Eric Boigelot,         An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
of the Brussels Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg            ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
at the Chambers of Louis Schiltz, 2 Rue du Fort Rheinsheim.               European Communities on 28 September 1999 by Manuel
                                                                          Tomás Carrasco Benı́tez, residing in London, represented by
The applicant claims that the Court should:                               Jean-Noël Louis, Greta-Françoise Parmentier and Véronique
                                                                          Peere, of the Brussels Bar, with an address for service in
— annul the note drawn up on 10 November 1998 by                          Luxembourg at the offices of Fiduciaire Myson SARL 30 Rue
    D. Van Hattem, Head of Service in the Infrastructure                  de Cessange.
    Directorate for the Ispra site, addressed to the applicant,
    by which, inter alia, he described the management by the              The applicant claims that the Court should:
    applicant over the last two years of a depository situated
    in building 76b as ‘not up to any acceptable standard’;               — annul the decision of the selection board in competition
— annul the decision of 22 June 1999, drawn up by Mr Erkki                     COM/T/R/ADM/A/98 not to admit the applicant to the
    Liikanen, Member of the Commission, in his capacity as                     competition;
    appointing authority, and brought to the applicant’s notice
    on 25 June 1999, rejecting the complaint lodged by the                — annul the decision of the selection board in joint vacancy
    applicant on 16 February 1999;                                             notices/internal competitions COM/R/5179/98, COM/R/
                                                                               5182/98, COM/R/5183/98, COM/R/5188/98 and COM/
— order the defendant to pay all the costs in any event;                       R/5190/98;
— order that the defendant be paid compensation for non-                  — order the defendant to pay the costs.
    material damage fixed, on an equitable basis, in the sum of
    LIT 25 000 000.
                                                                          Pleas in law and main arguments
Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                          The applicant, a Grade B official assigned to the European
The applicant contests the manner in which one of his                     Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products, contests the
superiors has addressed to him certain criticisms concerning              decision of the selection boards in the abovementioned
his efficiency and output in the performance of his duties.               competitions not to admit him to the tests in those compe-
                                                                          titions. The competitions in question form part of the new
In support of his claims, he pleads:                                      policy of the Commission, aimed at filling each year a certain
                                                                          number of permanently established posts within the research
— infringement of Articles 26 and 43 of the Staff Regulations,            budget.
    misuse of powers and abuse of process in the present case,
    and breach of the rights of the defence. In that regard, he
    considers, in particular, that it is intolerable that the             In support of his claims, the applicant pleads infringement of
    appointing authority should be able to categorise his                 Articles 4, 27 and 29(1)(b) of the Staff Regulations and breach
    output and efficiency without adhering to the procedures              of the principle of equal treatment, as well as a manifest error
    laid down in the Staff Regulations;                                   of assessment in the present case.
— infringement of Article 24 of the Staff Regulations and                 On the basis of those pleas, the applicant maintains, in
    breach of the principle of the protection of legitimate               particular, that:
    expectations, together with failure to fulfil its duty to have
    regard for his welfare and interests. He maintains in that
                                                                          — the criterion requiring candidates to have completed a
    regard, first, that the defendant, contrary to what it seeks
                                                                               minimum of ten years’ service as a servant of the European
    to demonstrate, has not introduced the necessary measures
                                                                               Communities, within the meaning of the Conditions of
    for his further training and instruction and, second, that
                                                                               employment of other agents, is unlawful, inasmuch as it
    the defendant has not taken all necessary and adequate
                                                                               may have the effect of eliminating from possible recruit-
    measures to protect him against the defamation which he
                                                                               ment persons who possess qualifications which are equiva-
    has suffered.
                                                                               lent to, or even higher than, those of the candidates
                                                                               admitted to the competition (competition COM/T/R/
                                                                               ADM/A/98);
 ---pagebreak--- C 333/36               EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                    20.11.1999
— as regards competition COM/R/5179/98, both the appli-                  by Sinaga, Sociedade de Indústrias Agrı́colas Açoreanas, SA,
    cant’s curriculum vitae and the annex to his written                 whose registered office is at 75 Rua de Lisboa, Ponta Delgada,
    application in the competition procedure show that he has            Azores, represented by Dr Mário Marques Mendes and by Dr
    14 years’ experience at European lever in the field of               Maria Luı́sa Duarte, with an address for service in Luxembourg
    new products and computer services. Moreover, he has                 at the Chambers of Aloyse May, 21 Grand-Rue, Luxembourg.
    management experience and, in particular, experience of
    the supervision of outside contracts;                                The action seeks the annulment of the annex to Commission
                                                                         Regulation (EC) No 1434/99 of 30 June 1999 in so far as it
— as regards competition COM/R/5182/98, the Commission                   establishes the sugar forecast supply balance for the Azores
    has committed a manifest error of assessment in consider-            and hold that earlier legislation continues to produce its effects.
    ing him to have had no experience in the field of contract
    management, in particular the management of contracts                The applicant claims that the Court should:
    for the provision of telematic network services;
                                                                         — find the application admissible;
— as regards competition COM/R/5183/98, the applicant
    has shown that he possesses over five years’ practical               — annul the annex to Commission Regulation (EC)
    experience in the evaluation of research and technological               No 1434/99 of 30 June 1999 in so far as it establishes the
    development programmes and projects;                                     sugar forecast supply balance for the Azores and hold that
                                                                             earlier legislation continues to produce its effects;
— as regards competition COM/R/5188/98, the competition
    notice does not state, as it should have done, that                  — order the Commission of the European Communities to
    candidates are required to possess professional experience               pay the costs.
    in those matters;
— as regards competition COM/R/5190/98, the applicant has                Pleas in law and main arguments
    proved that he possesses over 17 years’ experience in the
    fields prescribed.                                                   Infringement of Article 190 of the EC Treaty (now Article 253
                                                                         EC): manifestly inadequate and inconsistent statement of
                                                                         reasons
                                                                         Infringement of Articles 2, 3, and 8 of Council Regulation
                                                                         (EEC) No 1600/92 of 15 June 1992: the forecast supply
                                                                         balance does not take into account traditional trace flows
Action brought on 30 September 1999 by Sinaga, Socied-
ade de Indústrias Agrı́colas Açoreanas, SA, against the                 Infringement of Article 227 of the EC Treaty (now, after
         Commission of the European Communities                          amendment, Article 299 EC): failure to take account of the
                                                                         said provision when interpreting and applying legislative
                        (Case T-217/99)                                  provisions applicable to the extremely remote areas
                        (1999/C 333/79)                                  Infringement of Article 4(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 7(1)
                                                                         EC): the Commission has exercised its executive powers in a
                                                                         manifestly abusive and unlawful manner
                 (Language of the case: Portuguese)
                                                                         Breach of the principle of proportionality: the effects of the
An action against was brought before the Court of First                  forecast made in Regulation (EC) No 1434/99 are unfair and
Instance of the European Communities on 30 September 1999                unreasonable.