CELEX: C1997/074/47
Language: en
Date: 1997-03-08 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 4 January 1997 by Anna Maria Campogrande against Commission of the European Communities (Case T-3/97)

No C 74/22            EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                         8 . 3 . 97
Application brought on 12 December 1996 by J. J. M. van              The pleas in law and main arguments in support are
Rossum and C. C. W. M. van Rossum v. Council and                     analogous to those in Case T-206/96.
         Commission of the European Communities
                       ( Case T-207/96 )                             (') OJ No L 90, 1 . 4 . 1984 , p. 13 .
                                                                     ( 2 ) OJ No L 84, 23 . 9 . 1989 , p. 2 .
                          ( 97/C 74/46 )                             ( 3 ) OJ No L 131 , 26 . 5 . 1977, p. 1 .
                (Language of the case: Dutch)
An application was brought before the Court of First
Instance of the European Communities on 12 December                  Action brought on 4 January 1997 by Anna Maria
1996 against the Council and Commission of the                       Campogrande against Commission of the European
European Communities by J. J. M. van Rossum, residing                                              Communities
at Alphen (Netherlands ), and C. C. W. M. van Rossum,                                             ( Case T-3/97)
residing at Maasbommel ( Netherlands ), both represented
by A. A. M. van Beek, of the Tilburg bar.                                                           ( 97/C 74/47 )
                                                                                       (Language of the case: French)
The applicants claim that the Court of First Instance
should:
                                                                     An action against the Commission of the European
                                                                     Communities was brought before the Court of First
1 . declare that the European Economic Community is                  Instance of the European Communities on 4 January 1997
    liable in damages to the applicants;                             by Anna Maria Campogrande, of Brussels, represented by
                                                                     Marc-Albert Lucas, of the Liege Bar, with an address for
                                                                     service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Evelyne Korn,
2 . declare that the European Economic Community is                  21 rue de Nassau .
    liable to the applicants for the loss of income suffered
    by the applicants as a result of the application of
    Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 857/84 of 31 March                 The applicant claims that the Court should:
    1984 (') and the application of Council Regulation
    ( EEC ) No 764/89 of 20 March 1989 (2 ) amending                 — annul or declare illegal the Commission's decision of
    Regulation (EEC ) No 857/84, in so far as no provision
                                                                            19 July 1988 concerning the procedure for filling
    was made in those Regulations for a representative
                                                                           middle-management              posts    ( COM(88)PV      928 ,
    reference quantity to be allocated to SLOM assignees
                                                                           published in the 'Administrative Notices' No 578 of
    who had delivered no milk in the reference year
                                                                           5 December 1988 ), as amended by its decision of
    chosen by the Member State concerned pursuant to
                                                                           28 June 19 95 ( published in 'Administrative Notices'
    an undertaking under Council Regulation ( EEC)
                                                                           No 898 of 7 July 1995 ),
    No 1078/77 ( 3 ) of 17 May 1977;
                                                                     — in the alternative, variously:
3 . declare that the applicants have suffered loss of
    income in an amount constituted by the difference                      — annul or declare illegal the Commission's decision
    between the income, including turnover and herd                            to fill the post of Head of Unit of the 'Andean
    increase, which in the normal course of affairs they                       Pact' at career bracket A 4/A 5 ('Summaries of
    would have obtained from the quantities of milk                            Vacancy Notices' No 39 , of 14 December 1995 ,
    which they would have delivered if, during the period                      COM/ 141 /95 ),
    between 1 April 1984 ( the date of entry into force of
    Regulation ( EEC) No 857/84 ) and 31 March 1994
    (the date of expiry of the 1993/1994 period of levy ),                 — annul or declare illegal the vacancy notice for the
    they had had available to them the reference quantity                      post in question,
    of milk to which they were entitled and, on the other
    hand, the income which they actually received during                   — annul the decision of the appointing authority to
    the abovementioned period;                                                 appoint someone else to the post in question,
4.  declare that interest shall accrue on the amounts of             — in any event, order the appointing authority to pay the
                                                                           costs .
    income owing to the applicants with effect from the
    date of delivery of the Court's judgment, at the rate of
    8 % per annum, or at such rate as the Court may                  Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
    deem fit, until the date of full and final settlement;
                                                                     The applicant, an official in grade A 4 step 5, contests the
5 . order the defendants to pay the costs .                          appointing authority's decision rejecting her candidature
 ---pagebreak--- 8 . 3 . 97          1 EN 1                Official Journal of the European Communities                                 No C 74/23
for the post of Head of Unit responsible for relations with          Action brought on 6 January 1997 by Roberto D'Orazio
the member countries of the 'Andean Pact'. According                 and Pierre Hublau against Commission of the European
to the competition notice, the post fell in career bracket                                     Communities
A 5/A 4 .
                                                                                              ( Case T-4/97)
                                                                                                ( 97/C 74/48 )
In support of her claims, the applicant alleges, first of all,
breach of Article 5 (4 ) and Annex I to the Staff                                   (Language of the case: French)
Regulations inasmuch as, by applying to the circumstances
of this case its decision of 19 July 1988 concerning the             An action against the Commission of the European
procedure for filling middle-management posts, the                   Communities was brought before the Court of First
defendant has defined identically the duties corresponding           Instance of the European Communities on 6 January 1997
to posts in different career brackets. In this respect, she          by Roberto D'Orazio, residing in Clabecq ( Belgium ), and
considers that in its judgment in Case T- 10/94 Kratz v.             Pierre Hublau, residing in Tubize ( Belgium ), represented
Commission (') the Court of First Instance did not hold              by Patrice Bonbled, Caroline Sokolovitch and Olivier
that the Commission could define the duties attaching to             Gemberling, of the Brussels Bar.
two basic posts corresponding to separate career brackets
without placing them in rank. On the other hand, it seems
to have ruled that they could be filled at different levels          The applicants claim that the Court should:
where they were not of equal importance.
                                                                     — annul the Commission decision .
Second, the applicant alleges misuse of powers, in so far
as the contested decision forms part of a policy whose               Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
objective is the appointment of younger administrators, as
distinct from pursuing the interests of the service . In             The applicants, who are the presidents of the trade-union
addition, in her opinion, the procedure for filling middle­          and employee delegations of the public limited company
management posts is such as to prejudice the necessarily             Forges de Clabecq, an integrated steel undertaking that
objective character of the decision as to the level of the           produces liquid steel and finished flat products, take issue
post to be filled.                                                   with the Commission decision of 18 December 19 96
                                                                     opposing intervention by the Region of Wallonia in favour
                                                                     of the said undertaking.
Last, the applicant alleges breach of the principle that
officials are entitled to reasonable career prospects and of         That intervention was, in particular, to take the form of a
Article 5 ( 3 ) of the Staff Regulations, in that the staff          capital investment of Bfrs 1 500 000 000 by the Societe
policy guidelines and career-bracket profiles drawn up by            Wallonne de Siderurgie to recapitalize the beneficiary
the Commission work to the advantage of some officials               company.
and to the disadvantage of others who do not correspond
to them. Grade A 4 officials, including a majority of
officials with considerable seniority, like the applicant,           In support of their claims, the applicants first submit that
who wish to further their career, have no choice under               there has been a breach of the fundamental principles of
that policy but to apply for Head of Unit posts at grade             Community legality. They point out in this regard that the
A 5/A 4 level, in order to acquire the management                    right to work is a constitutional tradition accepted in all
experience required . By contrast, grade A 5 officials, a            of the Member States . This tradition was encapsulated by
majority of whom are young, enjoy greater career                     the European Parliament, on 12 April 1989, in the
opportunities as a result of the new rules for filling posts.        declaration of fundamental rights and freedoms . The
                                                                     applicants stress that this declaration encompasses
                                                                     collective social rights and social protection . The contested
                                                                     decision, in their view, applies a number of legal principles
In the alternative, the applicant claims that the decision           without taking account of human and sociological factors .
setting the level of the post in question is illegal . In that
regard, she considers that, having regard to the political
importance of the 'Andean Pact' unit, its work load, the             Second, the applicants submit that the Commission has
staff available to it and its budget, the post in issue should       adduced insufficient reasons for its decision to classify the
have been filled at grade A 3 . In the further alternative,          restructuring in question as public aid. In their view, the
the applicant also claims that the vacancy notice is illegal,        Commission did not carry out any economic analysis of
since it is imprecise and contains a manifest error of               the undertaking, and instead merely reproduced a number
 appreciation.                                                       of opinions issued by experts in the Region of Wallonia .
                                                                     Specifically, no economic argument can justify the
                                                                     conclusion that, once the restructuring has been
 (M Case T-10/94 Kratz v. Commission [ 1995 ] ECR 11-1455 .          completed, the Forges de Clabecq company cannot
                                                                     become viable .