CELEX: C1995/351/33
Language: en
Date: 1995-12-30 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 27 October 1995 by Bernard Connolly against the Commission of the European Communities (Case T-203/95)

No C 351 / 16         EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                  30 . 12 . 95
Action brought on 26 October 1995 by Dimitrios Coussios               Action brought on 27 October 1995 by Heinrich Gottmann
  against the Commission of the European Communities                  against the Council of the European Union and the
                        ( Case T-200/95                                         Commission of the European Communities
                          ( 95/C 351 /31 )                                                   ( Case T-202/95 )
                                                                                               ( 95/C 351 /32 )
                 (Language of the case: Greek)                                       (Language of the case: German)
                                                                      An action against the Council of the European Union and
                                                                      the Commission of the European Communities was brought
An action against the Commission of the European                      before the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First                     Communities on 27 October 1995 by Heinrich Gottmann,
Instance on 26 October 1995 by Dimitrios Coussios,                    residing at Volkmarsen-Külte ( Federal Republic of
represented by Georgios Sakellaropoulos, of the Athens Bar,           Germany ), represented by Bernd Meisterernst, Mechtild
with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers             Düsing, Dietrich Manstetten, Dr Frank Schulze and Dr
of Aloyse May, 31 Grand Rue .                                         Winfried Haneklaus, Rechtsanwälte, Münster, with an
                                                                      address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of
                                                                      Dupong & Associés, 14a Rue des Bains .
The applicant claims that the Court should :
                                                                      The applicant claims that the Court should :
— declare the application admissible,                                 ( 1 ) order the defendants jointly and severally to pay to the
                                                                             applicant milk quota compensation ( SLOM-III ) for the
                                                                             period from 2 April 1984 to 29 July 1993 , amounting
                                                                             to DM 41 078,16 , together with 8% interest from
— declare the implied refusal by the Commission to lift the
                                                                              19 May 1992 , and to pay the costs of the
     ban on the applicant's entering the Commission 's
     buildings invalid,                                                      proceedings;
                                                                       ( 2 ) join the present case to Case T-77/93 Hülseberg and
                                                                             Others v. Council and Commission of the EC, which is
— award the applicant an amount of ECU 300 000 for                           currently pending, and likewise stay the proceedings .
     non-material harm suffered,
                                                                       Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
— order the Commission to pay the costs .
                                                                       The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as those
                                                                       in Case T-20/94 .
 Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
 The applicant is an official of the Commission who has
 incured the disciplinary penalty of dismissal ; that penalty          Action brought on 27 October 1995 by Bernard Connolly
 has been challenged before the Court of First Instance and               against the Commission of the European Communities
 the case is still pending. In the present action the applicant                                Case T-203 / 95 )
 seeks a declaration of invalidity with regard to the implied
 refusal by the Commission to allow him entry into its                                           ( 95 /C 351 /33 )
 buildings, although he works as a company representative
 and needs to come to meetings with the competent                                      (Language of the case: French)
 authorities of the Commission . In the applicant's view, the
 Commission's refusal constitutes an abuse of rights and                An action against the Commission of the European
 power, since it imposes a second ancillary punishment for              Communities was brought before the Court of First
 which no provision is made in the Staff Regulations of                 Instance of the European Communities on 27 October 1995
 officials . Furthermore, it constitutes a negation of the              by Bernard Connolly, residing at Everberg ( Belgium ),
 constitutional right to freedom of communication and free              represented by Jacques Sambon and Pierre-Paul van
 development of the personality . The applicant also claims             Gehuchten, of the Brussels Bar, with an address for service
 payment of financial compensation for the non-material                 in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Louis Schiltz, 2 Rue du
  harm that he has suffered and is suffering as a result of the         Fort Rheinsheim .
  Commission 's conduct .
                                                                        The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                         — annul the decisions of 6 and 27 September 1995 and
                                                                             4 October 1995 ,
 ---pagebreak--- 30 . 12 . 95            EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                    No C 351 / 17
— order the Commission to pay the sum of Bfrs 750 000,                 Lastly, the applicant pleads infringement of Articles 25 and
      subject to increase or decrease in the course of the             88 of the Staff Regulations, in that the decision to suspend
      proceedings , by way of compensation for the combined            him did not fulfil the requirement to provide a statement of
      material and non-material damage suffered by the                 reasons in the light of the conditions governing the
      applicant as a result of the press campaign and malicious        application of the suspension provided for by the
      and defamatory allegations to which he has been                  aforementioned Article 88 .
      subjected ,
                                                                       As regards the application for compensation, the applicant
— order that the operative part of the judgment to be                  states, first, that the pursuit of irregular disciplinary
      delivered in the case be published, at the Commission's          proceedings constitutes wrongful conduct on the part of the
      expense, in the following newspapers : The Times, the            defendant and that he has suffered considerable material
      Daily Telegraph and the Financial Times,                         and non-material damage as a result of the matters set out.
                                                                       He maintains, second, that the publicity indulged in by the
— order the Commission to pay all of the costs .                       defendant in relation to him has caused him undeniable
                                                                       harm, and he seeks, by way of reparation, an order that the
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                    judgment to be delivered in the case be published at the
                                                                       expense of the Commission in the principal British
The applicant, who is a Head of Unit in the Commission's               newspapers which have taken up this matter.
Diectorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs,
states that he several times requested, without success,
permission to publish articles and contributions of an
analytical nature concerning the European monetary
system . Following the refusal by the Commission, he sought
and was granted leave on personal grounds, justified by
family reasons, in the course of which he completed a                  Action brought on 30 October 1995 by International
synthetical version of his analyses which was published                Express Carriers Conference ( IECC ) against Commission of
under the title : ' The rotten heart of Europe — The dirty war                           the European Communities
for Europe 's money '.                                                                          ( Case T-204/95 )
                                                                                                  ( 95/C 351 /34 )
The applicant states that the publication of the work met
with      an  immediate      reaction   from   the   Commission
 authorities : on 5 September 1995 , The Times published a                             (Language of the case: English)
 statement by the Commission's spokesman maintaining
 that there was no place in the Commission for an official              An action against the Commission of the European
 who had written such a work . On the day after that                    Communities was brought before the Court of First
 statement of principle was made, the appointing authority              Instance of the European Communities on 30 October 1995
 notified the applicant of its intention to institute disciplinary      by International Express Carriers Conference (IECC ),
 proceedings against him ( the first contested act ). On                represented by Eric Morgan de Rivery and Jacques Derenne,
 27 September 1995 a decision was taken to suspend him on               with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers
 the basis of Article 88 of the Staff Regulations of officials          of Bonn & Schmitt, 62 Avenue Guillaume, L-1650 .
 ( the second contested act ). The applicant maintains that the
 Commission meanwhile took part in a press campaign
 which it substantially fuelled : a number of his 'colleagues'          The applicant claims that the Court should :
 were quoted by the press in support of statements which
 were mendacious , defamatory or derogatory and which                   — declare the Commission's letter No SG(95)D/10794
 concerned his person , his state of health and his professional            non-existent,
 reputation. On 4 October 1995 the Commission finally
 decided to bring the matter before the Disciplinary Board              — in the alternative, annul Commission Decision No
  ( the third contested act ).                                               SG(95)D/ 10794 of 14 August 1995 and order such
                                                                             further or other relief as the Court considers appropriate
 The applicant considers that the Commission has failed to                   in order for the Commission to comply with Article 176
  observe the second paragraph of Article 87 of the Staff                    of the EC Treaty ,
  Regulations of officials, Annex IX to those Regulations, in
  particular Article 1 and the second paragraph of Article 8 ,          — order the Commission to pay the costs .
  and the principles governing ' disciplinary policy' as
  expressed in the note of 24 November 1983 , in that it has
  prejudged the outcome of the disciplinary proceedings and              Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
  has breached the principle of confidentiality inherent to
   proceedings of that kind .                                            The applicant, a professional organization composed of
                                                                         certain important private express companies, filed with the
   He also pleads a breach of the principle of equality, in that         Commission, on 13 July 1988 , a complaint under
   the Commission failed in his case to follow its usual practice,       Article 3 ( 2 ) of Regulation No 17/62 concerning the
   which is to authorize public utterances made without prior            infringement ( i ) of Article 85 ( 1 ) of the EC Treaty by certain
   permission by officials who are not in active service .               European public postal operators and ( ii ) of Article 86 of the