CELEX: C2003/213/73
Language: en
Date: 2003-09-06 00:00:00
Title: Case T-150/03: Action brought on 30 April 2003 by Jose Maria Sison against the Council of the European Union

C 213/36                EN                            Official Journal of the European Union                                         6.9.2003
ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST                                  (3) order Europol to pay the applicant compensation includ-
                            INSTANCE                                                ing in any event the costs of the proceedings.
                          of 25 June 2003
                                                                              Pleas in law and main arguments
in Case T-175/03 R: Norbert Schmitt v European Agency
                        for Reconstruction
                                                                              The applicant has worked for the defendant since 1 July 1999.
                 (Interim relief — Admissibility)                             On 1 July 2003 her contract expires. However, the applicant’s
                                                                              request for a renewal of her contract was rejected by the
                                                                              defendant. The applicant is challenging that decision.
                          (2003/C 213/71)
                    (Language of the case: French)                            In support of her application the applicant first alleges an
                                                                              infringement of the duty to provide a statement of reasons.
In Case T-175/03 R: Norbert Schmitt, residing in Koellerbach                  The applicant goes on to assert that the defendant exceeded its
(Germany), represented by L. Polanz, lawyer, against European                 policy-making powers. The defendant drew up basic principles,
Agency for Reconstruction (Agent: C. Manolopoulos) —                          policy rules and a stage plan to ensure that contracts are
application for suspension of operation of the decision of the                extended in a clear and transparent manner. According to the
European Agency for Reconstruction to revoke the applicant’s                  applicant the defendant exceeded its margin of discretion in
contract of employment — the President of the Court of First                  the application of those rules.
Instance has made an order on 25 June 2003, the operative
part of which is as follows:
                                                                              Finally, the applicant submits that there was an infringement
1.    The application for interim relief is dismissed.                        of the duty of care, as well as an infringement of the principle
                                                                              of equal treatment.
2.    Costs are reserved.
                                                                              Lastly, the applicant asserts that the defendant misused its
                                                                              competence. The applicant states that the Netherlands Minister
                                                                              for Home Affairs carried out a security check on the applicant
                                                                              at the defendant’s request. That investigation disclosed nothing
                                                                              adverse against the applicant. However, according to the
                                                                              applicant, the mere fact that a security check was carried out
Action brought on 29 April 2003 by Elisabeth Saskia Smit                      constituted the actual reason for the refusal to extend her
                             v Europol                                        contract.
                          (Case T-143/03)
                          (2003/C 213/72)
                    (Language of the case: Dutch)
                                                                              Action brought on 30 April 2003 by Jose Maria Sison
                                                                                        against the Council of the European Union
An action against Europol was brought before the Court of
                                                                                                      (Case T-150/03)
First Instance of the European Communities on 29 April 2003
by Elisabeth Saskia Smit, represented by P. de Casparis and
M.F. Baltussen.                                                                                       (2003/C 213/73)
The applicant claims that the Court should:                                                      (Language of the case: English)
(1) annul the rejection by Europol on 25 February 2003
      of the applicant’s complaint against the decision of
      30 September 2002, together with the latter decision;                   An action against the Council of the European Union was
                                                                              brought before the Court of First Instance of the European
(2) order Europol to extend the applicant’s contract of                       Communities on 30 April 2003 by Jose Maria Sison, Utrecht,
      employment until 1 July 2007 or such other date as the                  the Netherlands, represented by Mr J. Fermon, Mr A. Comte,
      Court may determine;                                                    Mr E. Schultz and Mr D. Gurses, lawyers.
 ---pagebreak--- 6.9.2003                EN                         Official Journal of the European Union                                              C 213/37
The applicant claims that the Court should:                                (5 ) Council Regulation of 27 December 2001 on specific restrictive
                                                                                measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view
                                                                                to combatting terrorism (OJ L 344, of 28.12.2001, p. 70).
                                                                           (6 ) Regulation of the European Parliement and the Council of 30 May
—      annul, on the basis of Article 230 EC, Council Decision
                                                                                2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council
       of 27th February 2003 (06/c/01/03): Answer adopted by                    and Commisson documents (OJ L 145, of 31.5.2001, p. 43).
       the council on the 27th February 2003 to the confirma-
       tory application of M. Jan Fermon sent by fax on the
       3rd February 2002 under Article 7(2) of the Regulation
       (EC) No 1049/2001, notified to the applicant’s counsel
       on 28 February 2003;
—      order the defendant to pay the costs.
                                                                           Action brought on 15 May 2003 by Eduard Vonier against
                                                                                   the Commission of the European Communities
Pleas in law and main arguments                                                                      (Case T-165/03)
                                                                                                     (2003/C 213/74)
The applicant in the present case is the same as in cases T-47/
3 Sison/Council and Commission (1) and T-110/03 Sison/                                         (Language of the Case: German)
Council (2), pursues the annulment of the defendant’s decision
not to get him access to all the documents which were the
basis of the Council Decision 2002/974/CE (3), repealing the
previous Decision 2002/848/EC ( 4), by which the applicant
itself and the New People’s Army (NPA) are included in the list            An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
pertinent to Article 2(3), of Regulation 2580/2001 (5).                    ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
                                                                           European Communities on 15 May 2003 by Eduard Vonier,
                                                                           resident in Amsterdam (Netherlands), represented by
                                                                           W. Schmolke, lawyer.
In support of its conclusions, the applicant submits:
                                                                           The applicant claims that the Court should:
—      The infringement of the right of access to documents, as
       forseen in Articles 1(2) EU, 6(1) EU, 255 EC and 4(1)(a),
       4(6) and 9(3) of Regulation 1049/2001 (6).                          —      annul and set aside the decision of the selection board of
                                                                                  30 July 2002 not to include him on the list of successful
                                                                                  candidates in Competition COM/A/601 for the field of
—      The violation of the principle of sound adminstration, as                  external relations;
       well as the duty to state reasons.
                                                                           —      order the Commission to pay EUR 10 000 in compen-
                                                                                  sation for the non-material damage caused to the him;
—      The violation of the general principle of Community Law
       enshrined in Article 6 ECHR and especially of the right to
       be informed promptly, in an understandable language                 —      order the Commission to pay the costs, pursuant to
       and in detail, of the nature and cause of the accusation.                  Article 87(3) of the Rules of Procedure if appropriate.
( 1) OJ C 101, of 26.4.2003, p. 41.
( 2) Not published in the OJ yet.
                                                                           Pleas in law and main arguments
( 3) Council Decision of 12 December 2002 implementing Article 2(3)
     of Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures
     directed against certain persons and entities with a view to          Competition COM/A/601 (1) was held in order to recruit
     combating terrorism and repealing Decision 2002/848/EC (OJ
     L 337, of 13.12.2002, p. 85).
                                                                           administrators in the fields of external relations and adminis-
( 4) Council Decision of 28 October 2002 implementing Article 2(3)
                                                                           tration of aid to non-member countries. The applicant, an
     of Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures      Austrian national, submitted an application for the field of
     directed against certain persons and entities with a view to          foreign relations. He was successful in the written procedure
     combatting terrorism and repealing Decision 2002/460/EC (OJ           and was admitted to the oral examination. By the contested
     L 295, of 30.10.2002, p. 12).                                         decision he was, however, informed that he could not be