CELEX: C2001/227/53
Language: en
Date: 2001-08-11 00:00:00
Title: Case T-114/01: Action brought on 23 May 2001 by Stefano Cocchi and Evi Hainz against the Commission of the European Communities

11.8.2001                EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                      C 227/27
Pleas in law and main arguments                                          Action brought on 22 May 2001 by Verónica Sabbag
                                                                           against the Commission of the European Communities
                                                                                                  (Case T-113/01)
In 1995 the Federal Republic of Germany gave notice of aid
for the privatisation of eight subsidiaries of the holding
                                                                                                  (2001/C 227/52)
company EFBE Verwaltungs GmbH, now Lintra Beteiligungs-
holding GmbH. By decision of 13 March 1996, communicated
by letter of 23 April 1996 (1), the Commission informed                                      (Language of the case: French)
Germany of its approval of aid for restructuring measures in
connection with the privatisation of Lintra Beteiligungsholding
GmbH.                                                                    An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
                                                                         ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
                                                                         European Communities on 22 May 2001 by Verónica Sabbag,
                                                                         residing in Brussels, represented by Jean-Noël Louis and
By the contested decision of 28 March 2001, the defendant                Véronique Peere, avocats, with an address for service in
has required Germany to reclaim aid totalling                            Luxembourg.
DEM 34 978 000 from Lintra Beteiligungsholding GmbH and
the Lintra subsidiaries. Aid amounting to DEM 3 195 559 is               The applicant claims that the Court should:
to be reclaimed from the applicant. The defendant asserts that           —     annul the decision of the Selection Committee in compe-
that aid has been used improperly and in breach of the                         tition COM/R/A/01/1999 to award the applicant a mark
statements in the approved restructuring plan. According to                    insufficient for her to be included on the reserve list;
the defendant, the aid granted has reportedly been used to pay
for services provided by Lintra Beteiligungsholding GmbH.                —     order the defendant to pay the costs.
                                                                         Pleas in law and main arguments
The applicant submits that the contested decision is unlawful
and void in relation to it if only because it was not granted any        The applicant took part in competition COM/R/A/01/1999.
aid whatsoever in breach of the decision of 13 March 1996.               She is contesting her non-inclusion in the reserve list for the
                                                                         selection of temporary agents responsible for the management
                                                                         of technological research and development programmes.
According to the applicant, it is significant that the defendant         In support of her claim, the applicant alleges:
has not asserted that the applicant misused the restructuring
                                                                         —     infringement of the selection notice, of essential pro-
aid. The defendant has relied solely on presumptions in its
                                                                               cedural requirements and of the rules governing the
request for recovery. The applicant states that all the aid which
                                                                               functioning of selection boards, as well as a manifest
was received by it was used exclusively for restructuring
                                                                               error of assessment;
measures. Moreover, the amount to be reclaimed from it was
set totally arbitrarily.                                                 —     breach of the obligation to provide a statement of reasons;
                                                                         —     infringement of the principle of equal treatment;
                                                                         —     non-compliance with the obligation to have regard to the
Furthermore, all aid from the defendant or from Germany                        interests and welfare of officials and violation of the
went to Lintra Beteiligungsholding GmbH and was passed on                      principle of sound administration.
to its subsidiaries only indirectly. For that reason a notice for
recovery can be issued solely to the parent company.
The applicant is also of the view that no basis is apparent for
claiming that there is joint and several liability between Lintra
Beteiligungsholding GmbH and the subsidiaries. Such liability            Action brought on 23 May 2001 by Stefano Cocchi and
is presumably asserted by the defendant solely because the               Evi Hainz against the Commission of the European
parent company itself is insolvent.                                                                Communities
                                                                                                  (Case T-114/01)
(1) A summary was published at OJ No C 168, 12.6.1996, p. 10.                                     (2001/C 227/53)
                                                                                             (Language of the case: French)
                                                                         An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
                                                                         ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
 ---pagebreak--- C 227/28               EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                    11.8.2001
European Communities on 23 May 2001 by Stefano Cocchi,                   The applicants claim that the Court should:
residing at Varano Borghi (Italy), and Evi Hainz, residing
at Besozzo (Italy), represented by Laure Levi and Georges                —     annul the decision of the Authority Empowered to
Vandersanden, avocats.                                                         Conclude Contracts (AECC) to cancel the recruitment
                                                                               procedures initiated by the publication of the following
The applicants claim that the Court should:                                    vacancy notices: COM/R/5638/00 and COM/R/5639/00
                                                                               (in the case of Francesca Bertolo), COM/R/5526/00 (in
—     annul the decisions of the Authority Empowered to                        the case of Laurence Bories), COM/R/5645/00 (in the
      Conclude Contracts (AECC), of unknown date, appointing                   case of Lionello Brovelli), COM/R/5889/99 (in the case of
      persons to fill the posts declared vacant by, respectively,              Philippe Chemin), COM/R/5520/00 (in the case of Laura
      vacancy notices COM/R/5530/00 of 24 February 2000                        Copes), COM/R/5646/00 (in the case of Maria Gabriella
      (in the case of Mr Cocchi) and COM/R/5500/00 of                          D’Elia), COM/R/5863/99 (in the case of Emanuele Mondi-
      24 February 2000 (in the case of Ms Hainz) and, in so far                ni) and COM/R/5521/00 (in the case of Helen Preissler);
      as may be necessary, annul the implicit decision rejecting
      the applicants’ complaints;                                        —     in the case of Philippe Chemin and Emanuele Mondini,
                                                                               annul, respectively, vacancy notices COM/R/5734/00
—     order the defendant to pay one euro by way of damages                    (Philippe Chemin) and COM/R/5735/00 (Emanuele Mon-
      for the prejudice suffered as a result of that decision, that            dini), published on 23 June 2000, and annul the decisions
      sum being fixed on an equitable and provisional basis;                   taken in the context of those new recruitment procedures;
—     order the defendant to pay all the costs.                          —     order the defendant to pay one euro by way of damages
                                                                               for the prejudice suffered as a result of the contested
                                                                               decisions, that sum being fixed on an equitable and
                                                                               provisional basis;
Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                         —     order the defendant to pay the costs.
The pleas in law and main arguments advanced in this
application are analogous to those put forward in Case
T-330/00 (1).                                                            Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                         The present action reproduces the facts and legal arguments
(1) OJ 2000 C 372, p. 15.
                                                                         put forward in support of the application of certain applicants
                                                                         in Case T-331/00 Bories and Others v Commission (1).
                                                                         (1) OJ C 372 of 23.12.2000, p. 16.
Action brought on 29 May 2001 by Francesca Bertolo
and Others against the Commission of the European
                          Communities
                         (Case T-115/01)                                 Action brought on 28 May 2001 by Marcos Roman Parra
                                                                           against the Commission of the European Communities
                        (2001/C 227/54)
                                                                                                  (Case T-117/01)
                   (Language of the case: French)
                                                                                                  (2001/C 227/55)
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the                                  (Language of the case: French)
European Communities on 29 May 2001 by Francesca Bertolo,
residing at Varese (Italy), Laurence Bories, residing at Vallon
Pont d’Arc (France), Lionello Brovelli, residing at Angera (Italy),      An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
Philippe Chemin, residing at Gif sur Yvette (France), Laura              ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
Copes, residing at Ispra (Italy), Maria Gabriella d’Elia, residing       European Communities on 28 May 2001 by Marcos Roman
at Taino (Italy), Emanuele Mondini, residing at Gavirate                 Parra, residing at Zaventem (Belgium), represented by Jean-
(Italy) and Helen Preissler, residing at Siegsdorf (Germany),            Noël Louis and Véronique Peere, avocats, with an address for
represented by Georges Vandersanden and Laure Levi, avocats.             service in Luxembourg.