CELEX: C1997/131/45
Language: en
Date: 1997-04-26 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 4 February 1997 by the Coopérative d'Elevage de la Vendée, de l'Anjou et du Poitou (CEVAP) and the Coopérative Agricole d'Eleveurs de Veaux du Bocage (CEVB) against the Council of the European Union (Case T-24/97)

26 . 4 . 97             EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                 No C 131 / 19
Action brought on 4 February 1997 by the Cooperative                      Instance of the European Communities on 6 February
d'Elevage de la Vendee, de l'Anjou et du Poitou (CEVAP)                   1997 by Michael Pulch, residing at Tervuren ( Belgium ),
and the Cooperative Agricole d'Eleveurs de Veaux du                       represented by Nicolas Lhoest, of the Brussels Bar, with an
Bocage ( CEVB ) against the Council of the European                       address for service in Luxembourg at the offices of
                                   Union                                  Fiduciaire Myson Sari, 30 Rue de Cessange .
                           ( Case T-24/97)
                             ( 97/C 131 /45 )                             The applicant claims that the Court should:
                (Language of the case: French)                            — annul the decision of the appointing authority dated
                                                                                14 May 1996 , appointing the applicant in grade A7,
An action against the Council of the European Union was                         step 3 , with effect from 1 October 1995 ,
brought before the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities on 4 February 1997 by the Cooperative
d'Elevage de la Vendee, de l'Anjou et du Poitou ( CEVAP),                 — rule that the applicant should be reclassified in grade
established at Saint Laurent sur Sèvre ( France ), and the                      A6, step 3 , with effect from 1 October 1995 , with all
Cooperative Agricole d'Eleveurs de Veaux du Bocage                              the financial and other consequences which that
( CEVB ), established at Torchamp ( France ), represented by                    entails,
Francois Sarda, of the Paris Bar, with an address for
service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Bonn &                           — order the defendant to pay all the costs.
Schmitt, 62 Avenue Guillaume .
                                                                          Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
The applicants claim that the Court should :
— annul Council Regulation ( EC ) No 2222/96 of                           The applicant, an official employed in Directorate-General
      18 November 1996, with all the consequences flowing                 I, contests his classification in grade A7. His claim is
     therefrom in law,                                                    based on his allegedly outstanding merits, as well as the
                                                                          professional experience gained by him as an administrator
— order the Council of the European Union to pay the                      in the German Ministry of Foreign Affairs, where he
     costs .                                                              occupied a post at a grade corresponding to grade A5 in
                                                                          the Community establishment plan . The applicant refers
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                       to two notes sent by his former Head of Unit and by the
                                                                          Director of Directorate B of DG I to the Staff Reports
                                                                          Committee, recommending his appointment in grade A6 .
The applicants, a series of independent French groups
producing veal for human consumption, contest Council
Regulation ( EC ) No 2222/96 of 18 November 1996                          The applicant makes the following assertions in support of
amending Regulation ( EEC ) No 805/68 on the common                       his claims :
organization of the market in beef and veal ( ] ), in
particular Article 1 ( 4 ) thereof, inasmuch as it requires the           — absence of a statement of reasons pursuant to the
Member States to pay an early marketing premium, the
conditions and methods of calculation of which have                             second paragraph of Article 25 of the Staff
                                                                                Regulations, inasmuch as the defendant puts forward
caused them serious damage.
                                                                                no argument of any substance which might have
                                                                                justified the rejection of his application for
The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as in                          classification in grade A6,
Case T-14/97 Sofivo and Others v. Commission, Case
T-15/97 Kermene and Vals v. Commission and Case T-20/
97 Sofivo and Others v. Commission (2 ).                                  — infringement of Article 31 (2 ) of the Staff Regulations
                                                                                 and of the general decision adopted by the
O OJ No L 296 , 21 . 11 . 1996 , p. 50 .                                         Commission with a view to introducing into its
(2 ) OJ No C 94, 22 . 3 . 1997.                                                  administrative practice the classification criteria ,
                                                                                 flowing from the judgment of the Court of First
                                                                                 Instance   of    5  October   1995   in   Case  T-17/95
                                                                                 Alexopoulou v. Commission ('),
                                                                          — the existence, in the present case, of a manifest error
Action brought on 6 February 1997 by Michael Pulch                               of assessment, and failure to fulfil the duty to have
    against the Commission of the European Communities                           regard for the interests and welfare of the applicant, in
                            ( Case T-25/97)                                      that the appointing authority took into account
                              ( 97/C 131 /46 )
                                                                                 neither his professional experience nor his outstanding
                                                                                 qualifications .
                (Language of the case: French)
                                                                           (') [ 1995 ECR-SC 683 .
An action against the Commission of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First