CELEX: C1999/204/97
Language: en
Date: 1999-07-17 00:00:00
Title: Case T-117/99: Action brought on 12 May 1999 by Natalia Martinez Paramo and Others against the Commission of the European Communities

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;
 ---pagebreak--- C 204/40              EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                    17.7.1999
— order the Commission to pay the costs.                                   treatment and proportionality, non-discrimination and
                                                                           abuse of power. According to the applicants, the appoint-
                                                                           ing authority organised different written tests, at different
Pleas in law and main arguments                                            times, and under conditions which were not identical;
                                                                        — infringement of Article 1(1)(b) and 5(5) of Annex III to the
The applicants, with one exception, are all category A or                  Staff Regulations, of notices of competitions COM/
category B temporary agents who were recruited pursuant to                 T/A/2/98 and COM/T/B/2/98, and of the principles of
Article 2(a) and/or Article 2(b) of the rules applicable to other          having due regard for the welfare of officials, equality of
agents, and entered internal competition COM/T/A/2/98 or                   treatment, legitimate expectations and good adminis-
COM/T/B/2/98.                                                              tration. The applicants maintain that the competition
                                                                           procedure implemented for the appointment as established
By a letter dated 3 March 1999, the applicants (with one                   officials of category A and category B temporary agents,
exception) were informed that they had failed to pass the                  did not fulfil the applicants’ legitimate expectations either
written tests. By a letter dated 23 March 1999, the head of                as regards the content of the examinations or the method
unit of DG IX informed the applicants that, as they had not                of marking used, in particular in the context of the
been admitted to the oral test of the competition, their                   necessary balance between an administration and its
contracts as temporary agents would expire on 30 June 1999,                agents, and also taking account of the interests of the
as previously agreed.                                                      service. The appointing authority in fact wished to decrease
                                                                           the number of its employees, in breach of rules and
The applicants rely upon                                                   principles which require the drawing up, in so far as
                                                                           possible, of a list of suitable candidates including at least
— infringement of Article 30 and Annex III of the Staff                    twice as many names as there are posts available through
    Regulations and in particular Article 1(1)(e), breach of               the competition, and to ensure the anonymity of the
    general principles of law, including the principles of equal           written tests, and this too was an abuse of power.