CELEX: C1998/397/62
Language: en
Date: 1998-12-19 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 15 October 1998 by Anastasios Bisopoulos against the Commission of the European Communities (Case T-168/98)

19.12.98             EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                 C 397/31
Louis, Thierry Demaseure and Ariane Tornel, of the                 tender to the defendant for the Project entitled FD RUS
Brussels Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at         9603 which concerned adapting Russian beef and dairy
the Office of Fiduciaire Myson SARL, 30 Rue de                     cattle farming to restructuring and which was worth ECU
Cessange, against Commission of the European                       3,7 million. Under the tendering procedure there were two
Communities (Agent: Ana Maria Alves Vieira) Ð                      rounds of evaluation to assess the shortlisted tenderers. In
application for suspension of operation of the                     the first round the applicant's tender was placed first,
Commission's decision of 18 January 1995 removing the              whereas in the second round it was only awarded second
applicant from his post as a disciplinary sanction Ð the           place.
President of the Court of First Instance made an order on
21 October 1998, the operative part of which is as
follows:
                                                                   The applicant was informed of the outcome of the second
                                                                   round of the tendering procedure, which is contested in
There is no need to adjudicate on the application for              this application, by letter of 26 June 1998. That letter
interim measures.                                                  stated that the applicant's tender was unsuccessful because
                                                                   it was inferior to the successful tender in terms of the
                                                                   experience of its team and its financial offer. However, in
                                                                   the tendering procedure as a whole there were serious
                                                                   breaches by the defendant and by the winning tenderer in
                                                                   the second round of the principle of fair competition on
                                                                   which every invitation to tender is based, with the result
Action brought by ADT Projekt Gesellschaft der
                                                                   that the award of the contract for this project must be
Arbeitsgemeinschaft Deutscher Tierzüchter mbH against
                                                                   annulled.
the Commission of the European Communities, received
by the Registry of the Court of Justice on 11 September
1998 and transmitted to the Court of First Instance
pursuant to the first paragraph of Article 47 of the EC
               Statute of the Court of Justice
                      (Case T-145/98)
                       (98/C 397/61)                               Action brought on 15 October 1998 by Anastasios
                                                                   Bisopoulos against the Commission of the European
              (Language of the case: German)                                               Communities
                                                                                         (Case T-168/98)
An action against the Commission of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First                                         (98/C 397/62)
Instance of the European Communities on 11 September
1998 by ADT Projekt Gesellschaft der Arbeitsgemeinschaft
Deutscher Tierzüchter mbH, Bonn (FRG), represented by                             (Language of the case: French)
Andreas Hansen, Rechtsanwalt, with an address for
service at Uelzener Straûe 8, Bienenbüttel (FRG).
                                                                   An action against the Commission of the European
The applicant claims that the Court should:                        Communities was brought before the Court of First
                                                                   Instance of the European Communities on 15 October
1.   declare that the decision of the defendant of 26 June         1998 by Anastasios Bisopoulos, residing in Brussels,
    1998, notified to the applicant on 6 July 1998, is             represented by Eric Boigelot, of the Brussels Bar, with an
    unlawful,                                                      address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of
                                                                   Louis Schiltz, 2 Rue du Fort Rheinsheim.
2. declare further that the defendant is bound to award
    the contract to carry out Project No FD RUS 9603 to
    the applicant,                                                 The applicant claims that the Court should:
3. Order the defendant to pay to the applicant the sum
    of DEM 550 000 by way of damages,                              Ð annul the decision of the appointing authority of
                                                                       12 February 1998, which took effect on 16 February
                                                                       1998 and was communicated to the applicant on
4. in the alternative, order the defendant to pay to the               27 February 1998, inasmuch as it classifies the
    applicant the sum of DEM 225 250 by way of
                                                                       applicant in grade A 5, step 5, which seniority in step
    damages.
                                                                       as from 1 May 1997;
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
                                                                   Ð annul the implicit decision rejecting the complaint of
The applicant, which operates a successful livestock                   25 May 1998, registered on 27 May 1998 under
consultancy throughout Eastern Europe, submitted a                     number R492/98;
 ---pagebreak--- C 397/32             EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                    19.12.98
Ð in so far as may be necessary, annul the implicit                The applicant claims that the Court should:
     rejection of the applicant's request, registered on
     27 May 1998, to be classified in grade A 4 with
     additional seniority in step in accordance with the           Ð declare unlawful the procedure to be followed in the
     Staff Regulations;                                                event of absence because of sickness, in force in the
                                                                       Council since 18 September 1997;
Ð order the defendant to pay the costs in any event.
                                                                   Ð annul the Council's decision to regard the applicant's
                                                                       absence from 9 to 22 February 1998 as unauthorised
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                    and to deduct that absence from her annual leave;
                                                                   Ð order the defendant to pay the costs.
The applicant maintains that, by appointing him to grade
A 5, step 5, instead of grade A 4 with additional seniority
in step, the appointing authority failed to take into              Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
account his professional experience and specialist skills; it
omitted to undertake any real examination of the
applicant's situation and thereby infringed the second             The applicant submits, first, that the defendant failed to
paragraph of Article 5(1), Article 5(3), the second                comply in the present case with the procedure to be
paragraph of Article 25 and Articles 31 and 32 of the              followed in the event of absence because of sickness or
Staff Regulations, as well as Annex I thereto.                     accident' which it itself introduced and brought to the
                                                                   notice of staff by Communication No 117/97 of
                                                                   18 September 1997.
In addition, the contested decisions in breach of the 1983
decision concerning the criteria applicable to appointment
in grade and classification in step on recruitment as              She further contests the lawfulness of that implementing
amended on 7 February 1986.                                        provision, in that it provides, in the event of a dispute
                                                                   concerning the conclusions of the medical examination,
                                                                   for an arbitration procedure' which disregards the rights
Furthermore, the appointing authority is required by               of defence of the person concerned, since it does not allow
general principles to apply equal treatment to the                 him to designate the doctor of his choice to safeguard his
situations of officials and to take administrative decisions       rights and interests by his presence.
which are based on proper grounds, that is to say, not
vitiated by manifest errors of law or of fact.
                                                                   In the applicant's opinion, where the administration has
                                                                   before it such a dispute, it is obliged to refer the matter to
Finally, the applicant pleads breach of the principle of the       an invalidity committee, in accordance with Article 59(3)
protection of legitimate expectations and misuse of                of the Staff Regulations.
powers.
                                                                   The applicant submits, finally, that the contested decisions
                                                                   lack any statement of reasons.
Action brought on 15 October 1998 by Maria Adelina
    Biasutto against the Council of the European Union
                       (Case T-171/98)                             Action brought on 26 October 1998 by Zino Davidoff SA
                                                                   and Davidoff and Cie SA against the European Parliament
                        (98/C 397/63)                                        and the Council of the European Union
                                                                                         (Case T-177/98)
               (Language of the case: French)                                              (98/C 397/64)
An action against the Commission of the European                                 (Language of the case: German)
Communities was brought before the Court of First
Instance of the European Communities on 15 October
1998 by Maria Adelina Biasutto, residing in Brussels,              An action against the European Parliament and the
represented by Jean-NoeÈl Louis and FrancËoise Parmentier,         Council of the European Union was brought before the
of the Brussels Bar, with an address for service in                Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
Luxembourg at the Office of Fiduciaire Myson SARL, 30              26 October 1998 by Zino Davidoff SA and Davidoff and
Rue de Cessange.                                                   Cie SA, of Fribourg and Geneva (Switzerland), represented