CELEX: C1996/133/56
Language: en
Date: 1996-05-04 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 6 February 1996 by John Carvel and Guardian Newspapers Limited against the Council of the European Union (Case T-19/96)

No C 133/24          EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                      4. 5 . 96
adversely affect the possibility for a part transferee of the       Action brought on 6 February 1996 by John Carvel and
land to produce a proper quantity of milk on it for up to ten       Guardian Newspapers Limited against the Council of the
years from the expiry of that period.                                                       European Union
                                                                                             ( Case T-19/96 )
SLOM III producers are a clearly defined group. Just as the                                    ( 96/C 133/56 )
Community legislature has recognized that it must treat
differently those producers who held on to their entire
holdings thoughout the period of their non-marketing                                (Language of the case: English)
schemes and those who transferred a part of it, treating them
as two separate groups for SLOM allocation purposes, the
Community authorities must know that for that group of              An action against the Council of the European Union was
part-transferors there exists a corresponding separate and          brought before the Court of First Instance of the European
                                                                    Communities on 6 February 1996 by John Carvel and
distinct group of 'part-transferees'.
                                                                    Guardian Newspapers Limited, represented by Onno
                                                                    W. Brouwer and Frédéric P. Louis, with an address for
The applicant finally contends that his legitimate                  service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Marc Loesch,
expectation that he would be able to resume milk                    11 , rue Goethe .
production at the end of the non-marketing scheme with
which he had agreed to comply, has been frustrated by the
Council and the       Commission's     failure  to  introduce       The applicants claim that the Court should:
SLOM III quota until 1993 .
                                                                    — annul the decision of the Council whereby the Council
                                                                         refuses access to the text of the decisions adopted by the
                                                                        Justice and Home Affairs             Council of 29      and
                                                                         30 November 1993 ,
                                                                    — order the Council to pay the applicants' costs pursuant
                                                                         ot Article 87 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of
Action brought on 26 January 1996 by Donald George                       First Instance .
Gage and David John Gage against the Council of the
European Union and the Commission of the European
                         Communities                                Pleas in law and main arguments
                       ( Case T-11 /96 )
                          96/C 133/55                               The same applicants as in Case T-194/94 resolved by
                                                                    judgment of 19 October 1 995 , challenge the Council's
                                                                    decision in its letter of 27 November 1995 , refusing to
              (Language of the case: English)                       distribute to them the text of the decisions adopted by the
                                                                    Justice and Home Affairs Council of 29 and 30 November
                                                                    1993 .
An action against the Council of the European Union and
the Commission of the European Communities was brought              In the abovementioned judgment, the Court of First
before the Court of First Instance of the European                  Instance found that the defendant, by refusing to send to the
Communities on 26 January 1 996 by Donald George Gage               applicants documents relating to a Justice and Home Affairs
and David John Gage, represented by Alan Maclean and                Council, as well as documents relating to an Agricultural
Joanne Keddie, Dawson & Co, 2 New Square, Lincoln's                 Council, had failed to balance the interest it may have in
Inn, London WC2A 3RZ, England .                                     keeping the said documents confidential, in order to
                                                                    safeguard the confidentiality of its proceedings, with the
The applicant claims that the Court should:                         interest of the applicants in gaining access to those
                                                                    documents. The contested decision in the present case was
                                                                    taken in order to comply with that judgment.
— order damages against the Council and/or the
    Commission as per a report of D R Gasson, included in
    the application, and                                            The applicants submit first of all that the decision
                                                                    constituted by the Council's letter of 27 November 1995
— order the Council and/or the Commission to pay the                infringes Council Decision 93/731 , in so far as the defendant
    costs .                                                         institution, contrary to the wording of that Decision, which
                                                                    lays down rules on access to documents, sent to the
                                                                    applicants a press release containing a list of the decisions
Pleas in law and main arguments                                     taken at the meeting of the Justice and Home Affairs
                                                                    Council on 29 and 30 November 1993 , instead of providing
The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as those           them with the actual text of the documents they had
in Case T- 1 0/96 Benjamin Laurence Lay.                            requested .
                                                                    As a second ground for annulment, the applicants submit
                                                                    that the Council did not provide the applicants with any
 ---pagebreak--- 4 . 5 . 96            EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                No C 133/25
reasoning for its decision, thereby infringing Article 7 ( 3 ) of    He maintains, first, that, in view of his having been turned
Council Decision 93/73 1 /EC and Article 190 of the EC               down in favour of a candidate who did not meet the
Treaty.                                                              minimum requirements as to specific knowledge and
                                                                     experience, in disregard of Article 7 of the Staff Regulations,
                                                                     the appointment in issue was not in the interest of
                                                                     the service . Consequently, that appointment appears
                                                                     necessarily to be vitiated by misuse of powers.
                                                                     Moreover, there has been a breach of the principle of the
Action brought on 21 February 1996 by Antonio Giannini               protection of legitimate expectations, in that, contrary to
  against the Commission of the European Communities                 the Commission's current practice in such matters, the
                        ( Case T-21 /96 )                            description of the post to be filled contained a serious
                          ( 96/C 133/57)                             anomaly, since, by contrast with the descriptions normally
                                                                     given in respect of almost all posts advertised by the
                                                                     Commission, it made no reference to the tasks to be carried
                (Language of the case: French)                       out, nor to the qualifications needed for those tasks in terms
                                                                     of knowledge and experience. Is follows that, in the present
An action against the Commission of the European                     case, the Commission's conduct is compatible neither with
Communities was brought before the Court of First                    the aim of the vacancy notice, which is to provide interested
Instance of the European Communities on 21 February                  parties with detailed information concerning the
1996 by Antonio Giannini, residing in Brussels, represented          qualifications required in order to apply for the post in
by Marc Dallemagne and Carlo Locchi, of the Brussels Bar,            question, nor with the principle that officials must be able to
with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers            rely on a practice regularly followed by the administrative
of Jeannot Biver, 7 Côte d'Eich.                                     authority.
                                                                     Lastly, the applicant pleads the commission in the present
The applicant claims that the Court should :                         case of a manifest error of appreciation, based on disregard
                                                                     of Articles 4, 29 ( 1 ) and 45 of the Staff Regulations and of
— annul the Commission's decision rejecting the                      the vacancy notice itself. In concrete terms, it is apparent
     applicant's application for post COM/151/94 , which             from an examination of the merits of the ultimately
     was notified to the applicant on 28 April 1995 ,                successful candidate that his application did not meet the
                                                                     minimum qualifications required by the vacancy notice . The
— annul the defendant's decision appointing another                  person in question has no experience in the negotiation or
     candidate to the grade A3 post of Head of Unit DG I.D.l         management of international agreements relating to textiles.
     'Negotiation and management of textile agreements;              Nor does he possess the knowledge needed in order to
     clothing and other industries' pursuant to vacancy              accomplish the tasks entrusted to that unit. It follows that
     notice COM/151 /94, which was brought to the                    the appointing authority exceeded the parameters of the
     applicant's knowledge on 3 May 1995 ,                           said vacancy notice .
— annul the decision rejecting the complaint submitted by
     the applicant on 25 July 1995 , which was brought to his
     knowledge on 3 May 1995 ,
— order the defendant to pay the applicant ECU 5 000 by              Action brought on 27 February 1996 by Eisa De Persio
     way of compensation for the non-material damage                     against Commission of the European Communities
     suffered by him, subject to increase or decrease during                                  ( Case T-23/96 )
     the course of the proceedings,
                                                                                                ( 96/C 133/58 )
— order the defendant to pay the applicant ECU 15 000 by
     way of compensation for the economic damage suffered                           (Language of the case: Italian)
     by him, subject to increase or decrease during the course
     of the proceedings,                                             An action against the Commission of the European
                                                                     Communities was brought before the Court of First
— order the defendant to pay all of the costs .                      Instance on 27 February 1996 by Eisa De Persio, an official
                                                                     of the Commission of the European Communities,
Pleas in law and main arguments                                      represented by Giovanni Petroni and Franco Giampietro, of
                                                                     the Rome Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at
                                                                     the chambers of Gilles Bounéou, 15 Avenue du Bois .
The applicant, a grade A4 Commission official, contests the
rejection of his application for the grade A3 post of Head of
Unit DG I.D.l 'Negotiation and management of textile                 The applicant claims that the Court should:
agreements; clothing and other industries', particularly in
the light of the vacancy notice on the basis of which the post       — declare unlawful the ousting of the applicant from her
in question was filled .                                                 duties and the pressure and intimidation intended to