CELEX: C2000/302/80
Language: en
Date: 2000-10-21 00:00:00
Title: Case T-240/00: Action brought on 12 September 2000 by Lars Bo Rasmussen against the Commission of the European Communities

21.10.2000            EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                      C 302/35
Pleas in law and main arguments                                         The applicant claims that the Court should:
By the contested decision, the appointing authority terminated          —     annul the decisions taken by the appointing authority by
the secondment of the applicant to the political Group for a                  way of compliance with the judgment of the Court of
Europe of Democracies and Diversities and reinstated him in a                 First Instance of 14 April 1999 in Case T-50/98 pursuant
post in the Directorate-General for Information and Public                    to Article 176 of the EC Treaty (now Article 233 EC);
Relations.
                                                                        —     annul, in so far as may be necessary, the decision adopted
                                                                              by the Commission on 25 May 2000 in response to the
The applicant contests the legality of that decision, seeks its               applicant’s complaint No R/21/2000 of 18 January 2000,
annulment and claims compensation for the damage resulting                    by which it expressly rejected that complaint;
from it. He maintains that it infringes the rights of the defence
and the obligation to provide a statement of reasons. In                —     order the defendant to pay to the applicant compensation
addition, he pleads a breach of the principle of the protection               in the sum of BEF 3 000 000 or such other higher sum
of legitimate expectations and of the duty to have regard for                 as the Court may consider fair and reasonable;
the welfare and interests of officials. Lastly, he claims that the
contested decision is vitiated by a misuse of powers.                   —     order the defendant to pay all the costs.
                                                                        Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                        By decision of 28 July 1999, the Commission informed the
                                                                        applicant that the Promotion Committee had carried out a
Action brought on 12 September 2000 by Lars Bo Ras-                     comparison of his merits with those of all the officials
mussen against the Commission of the European Com-                      proposed and those of all the officials regarded as most
                            munities                                    deserving of promotion to grade A 4 in 1997, and that,
                                                                        following that comparative examination, it had decided not to
                        (Case T-240/00)                                 include the applicant’s name in the list of officials most
                                                                        deserving of promotion in 1997. That decision was adopted
                        (2000/C 302/80)                                 in consequence of the judgment of the Court of First Instance
                                                                        of 14 April 1999 in Case T-50/98, by which that Court
                                                                        annulled the Commission’s decision not to promote the
                  (Language of the case: French)                        applicant in 1997.
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-               By the present action, the applicant maintains that the
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the              Commission has not correctly complied with the aforesaid
European Communities on 12 September 2000 by Lars Bo                    judgment. He claims that the Commission has failed to fulfil
Rasmussen, residing at Dalheim (Grand Duchy of Luxem-                   its obligation to provide a statement of reasons and that it has
bourg), represented by Joëlle Choucroun, of the Luxembourg              infringed Article 45 of the Staff Regulations of officials and
Bar.                                                                    the principle of equal treatment.