CELEX: C1999/204/96
Language: en
Date: 1999-07-17 00:00:00
Title: Case T-103/99: Action brought on 27 April 1999 by Associazione delle Cantine Sociali Venete against the European Ombudsman and the European Parliament

17.7.1999              EN                       Official Journal of the European Communities                                       C 204/39
Action brought on 27 April 1999 by Associazione delle                      The applicant emphasises that, according to the Decision on
Cantine Sociali Venete against the European Ombudsman                      public access to Commission documents, recourse to the
                  and the European Parliament                              Ombudsman is one of the ‘means of redress that arc available’
                                                                           against a European institution’s refusal of a request for access.
                                                                           His activity was therefore in no way comparable with a mere
                         (Case T-103/99)                                   recommendation or an opinion of any other institution.
                         (1999/C 204/96)
                    (Language of the case: Italian)
An action against the European Ombudsman and the European
Parliament was brought before the Court of First Instance of
the European Communities on 27 April 1999 by Associazione
delle Cantine Sociali Venete, represented by Ivone Cacciavillani
and Antonio Cimino, both of the Venice and Padua Bar, with                 Action brought on 12 May 1999 by Natalia Martinez
an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Alain              Paramo and Others against the Commission of the Euro-
Lorang, 51 Rue Albert I.                                                                          pean Communities
The applicant claims that the Court should:                                                        (Case T-117/99)
— Declare that the European Ombudsman unlawfully failed
     to act, within the meaning of Article 175 of the EC Treaty,                                   (1999/C 204/97)
     in relation to the applicant’s request presented (with other
     requests) on 3 June 1997 (received on 9 June 1997) for
     intervention in a case of refusal by the Commission of
     access to documents.
                                                                                              (Language of the case: French)
— Order the defendants to pay the costs.
                                                                           An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
                                                                           ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
Pleas in law and main arguments                                            European Communities on 12 May 1999 by Natalia Martinez
                                                                           Paramo, Jean-Marc Venineaux, Marc Luyckx, of Brussels, Ron
                                                                           Moys, of Kent, the United Kingdom, Ines Van Lierde, Jean-Paul
The applicant association challenges the Ombudsman’s dis-                  Richard, Richard Harding, Myrian Izquierdo, Helmut Weber,
missal of its request for intervention concerning a case of                Mairead Buckley, Anna Sodro, Jean-Martial Marenne, Walter
refusal by the Commission of access to documents concerning                Marchand Lutwin, Carmelo Calamia, of Brussels, Anastassia
the procedure followed by the Commission in determining the                Vakalopoulou, of Luxembourg, Luigi Malinconico, Thérèse
compulsory distillation of table wines for the year 1993/1994.             Nibelle, Michael Horgan, Maria Jadot, Kader Chaffi, Hervé
                                                                           Lefeuvre, of Brussels, Marcello Magliulo, of Longwy, France,
                                                                           Bernard Bertrand, Marc-Ivan Miot, Catherine Cloquette, Nicola
In support of its claims, the applicant argues that there has              Pellegrino, Vassiliki Pechlivanidou, of Brussels and Barry
been infringement of:                                                      Stephen Magee, of Gonderange, Luxembourg, represented by
                                                                           Eric Boigelot, of the Brussels Bar, with an address for service in
— Article 3 of Decision 94/262/ECSC, EC, Euratom of the                    Luxembourg at the Chambers of Louis Schiltz, 2 Rue du Fort
     European Parliament of 9 March 1994 on the regulations                Rheinsheim.
     and general conditions governing the performance of the
     Ombudsman’s duties;
                                                                           The applicants claim that the Court should:
— Article 138e of the EC Treaty; and
                                                                           — annul the procedure and tests for the internal competition
— Commission Decision 94/90/ECSC, EC, Euratom of 8 Feb-                        COM/T/A/2/98 for the appointment as established officials
     ruary 1994 on public access to the Commission docu-                       of category A temporary agents, with a view to creating a
     ments.                                                                    reserve list of principal administrators. administrators and
                                                                               assistant administrators;
In particular, the applicant argues that the Ombudsman has
not fulfilled his function in this case and, despite the long time         — annul the procedure and tests for the internal competition
which elapsed and the notice sent to him to which he did not                   COM/T/B/2/98 for the appointment as established officials
even reply, has failed to adopt any of the decisions and/or                    of category B temporary agents, with a view to creating a
initiatives which were his responsibility and which were                       reserve list of principal assistants, assistants, and deputy
requested by the applicant.                                                    assistants;