CELEX: C1996/095/31
Language: en
Date: 1996-03-30 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 21 December 1995 by 'T' against the European Parliament (Case T-233/95)

30 . 3 . 96          | EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                 No C 95/ 15
2 . orders the parties to bear their own costs, including              Hoskins, Barrister, of the Bar of England and Wales, with an
      those incurred in the procedure for interim measures.            address for service at Brick Court Chambers, 8 Avenue de la
                                                                       Joyeuse Entree, Brussels, against Council of the European
(M OJ No C 43 , 12 . 2 . 1994 .                                        Union ( Agents: Jürgen Huber and Guus Houttuin ) and
                                                                       Commission of the European Communities ( Agents: Frank
                                                                       Benyon and Lucio Gussetti ) — application for suspension of
                                                                       the operation of Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 3254/91 of
                                                                       4 November 1991 prohibiting the use of leghold traps in the
                                                                       Community and the introduction into the Community of
                                                                       pelts and manufactured goods of certain wild animal species
 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE                               originating in countries which catch them by means of
                      of 15 February 1996                              leghold traps or trapping methods which do not meet
                                                                       international humane trapping standards ( OJ No L 308 ,
in Case T-125/95 : Hassan Belhanbel v. Commission of the
                                                                       p. 1 ) — the President of the Court of First Instance made an
                   European Communities ( 1 )                          order on 12 February 1996 , the operative part of which is as
(Official — Competition — Decision of the selection board              follows :
that a candidate has failed the oral test — Scope of the
                  obligation to state reasons)
                                                                       1 . the application for interim measures is dismissed;
                             ( 96/C 95/29 )
                                                                       2.   costs are reserved.
                (Language of the case: French)
In Case T-125/95 , Hassan Belhanbel, a former member of
the temporary staff of the Commission of the European
Communities, residing at Namur ( Belgium ), represented by
Jean-Noel Louis, Thierry Demaseure and Ariane Tornel, of               Action brought on 21 December 1995 by 'T' against the
the Brussels Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg                                 European Parliament
at the offices of Fiduciaire Myson Sari, 1 Rue Glesener, v.
Commission of the European Communities ( Agent: Ana                                           Case T-233/95 )
Maria Alves Vieira ) — application for the annulment of the                                     ( 96/C 95/31 )
decision of the selection board in competition COM/B/765
awarding the applicant, in the oral test, a lower mark than
the minimum required and refusing to enter his name on the                             (Language of the case: Greek)
reserve list — the Court of First Instance ( Third Chamber ),
composed of: C.P. Briët, President, and B. Vesterdorf and              An action against the European Parliament was brought
A. Potocki, Judges; H. Jung, Registrar, has given a judgment           before the Court of First Instance on 21 December 1995 by
on 15 February 1996, in which it:                                      'T', represented by Harisios Tagaras, of the Thessaloniki
                                                                       Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the
1 . dismisses the action;                                              Chambers of Evelyne Korn, 21 Rue de Nassau.
2 . orders the parties to bear their own costs.                        The applicant claims that the Court should :
( ! ) OJ No C 208 , 12 . 8 . 1995 .                                    — annul the staff report on the applicant for the period
                                                                           1 January 1993 to 1 January 1995 , in particular heading
                                                                           10 . 1 ,
                                                                       — annul the decision of the Secretary-General of the
                                                                           Parliament of 19 September 1995 confirming the above
                                                                           staff report,
               ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT
          OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE                               — order the Parliament to pay the costs .
                      of 12 February 1996
in Case T-228/95 R: S. Lehrfreund Ltd v. Council of the                Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
European Union and Commission of the European
                             Communities
                                                                       The applicant, an official of the Parliament in Grade A 5
                             ( 96/C 95/30 )                            serving in the Legal Service, states that, for the purpose of
                                                                       promoting another candidate, the detailed part of his staff
                                                                       report for the period 1 January 1993 to 1 January 1995 was
               (Language of the case: English)                         decided in advance and did not correspond to reality . In
                                                                       support of that claim he relies on the lack of consistency
In Case T-228/95 R: S. Lehrfreund Ltd, established in                  between the detailed report and the general assessment
London, represented by Nicholas Forwood QC and Mark                    contained in the report. In his view the huge improvement
 ---pagebreak--- No C 95/ 16           EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                      30 . 3 . 96
in the general assessment in comparison with the previous           that report, which was drawn up without involving all the
two-year period was not reflected in the detailed marking.          parties concerned, as all such investigations, if properly
Accordingly the staff report was drawn up in infringement           conducted, should, contains several inaccuracies from the
of the relevant rules and the principle of sound                    technical point of view. On 21 April 1994 Somagaz
administration and there was a misuse of powers . Further,          unilaterally terminated the contract, despite having used the
the applicant relies on the one hand on infringement of his         bottles in first as well as the second batch .
rights of defence, since he was not given the opportunity of
defending his interests, and, on the other hand, of                 The applicant claims that the Commission's staff have not
infringement of the duty to state reasons, in view of the fact      taken any steps to authorize payment for the goods
that the Secretary-General of the Parliament to whom the            consigned, causing the applicant significant damage, which
applicant appealed, did not give reasons for his negative           is not only economic; Itamsider has had to bear the costs of
decision .                                                          production and dispatch to Mauritania, without being paid,
                                                                    and as a result finds itself in an extremely difficult financial
                                                                    position, to the extent of suffering an action for the
                                                                    commencement of bankruptcy proceedings .
                                                                    The applicant considers that the Commission's conduct in
                                                                    the matter entails liability on the part of the Community, in
Action brought on 17 January 1996 by Francesco Perillo              accordance with Article 178 and the second paragraph of
  against the Commission of the European Communities                Article 215 of the EC Treaty, and requests that the
                                                                    Commission be ordered to pay him compensation to make
                         ( Case T-7/96 )
                                                                    good the loss he has suffered.
                           ( 96/C 95/32
                (Language of the case: French)
An action against the Commission of the European
                                                                    Action brought on 24 January 1996 by Europeenne
Communities was brought before the Court of First
                                                                    Automobile SARL against the Commission of the European
Instance of the European Communities on 17 January 1996                                      Communities
by Francesco Perillo, residing at Altamura ( Italy ),
represented by Mario Spandre, of the Brussels Bar, with an                                   Case T-9/96 )
address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Pierre                                  ( 96/C 95/33 )
Thielen, 21 Rue de Nassau .
                                                                                    (Language of the case: French)
The applicant claims that the Court should :
                                                                    An action against the Commission of the European
— order the defendant to pay compensation of ECU                    Communities was brought before the Court of First
    1 338 775 , subject to increase or decrease during the          Instance of the European Communities on 24 January 1996
    proceedings,                                                    by Europeenne Automobile SARL, established at
                                                                    Carcassonne ( France ), represented by Jean Claude
— order the defendant to pay interest calculated on the             Fourgoux, of the Paris Bar, with an address for service in
    amounts due as from 14 April 1994,                              Luxembourg at the Chambers of Pierrot Schiltz, 4 Rue
                                                                    Beatrix de Bourbon .
— order the defendant to pay all the costs .
                                                                    The applicant claims that the Court should:
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
                                                                   — order the Commission to pay to it the sum of
                                                                        ECU 200 000 as damages for the Commission's
The applicant, who manufactures gas-bottles under the                   non-contractual liability,
name of Itamsider, states that when tenders were invited
under call No 3605 of the Regional Gas Programme,
financed by the European Development Fund, he secured              — order the Commission to pay the costs .
the contract to supply 40 000 empty gas-bottles to Societe
Mauritanienne de Gaz ( Somagaz ). To fulfil its duties under        Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
contract, Itamsider sent the goods to Mauritania in four
batches : 7 007 bottles on 5 October 1993 , 24 381 on              The applicant, an undertaking carrying on business as an
1 December 1993 , 6 779 on 7 February 1994 and 1 889 on             intermediary in the distribution of motor vehicles by means
14 February 1994; the goods were stored in the port and             of parallel imports made by it as agent for the final consumer
subsequently removed by Somagaz . Somagaz was critical of           in accordance with the provisions of Commission
the quality of the bottles but without giving much detail . On      Regulation ( EEC ) No 123/85 , criticizes the failure of that
1 March 1994, on the initiative of the Commission's                 institution to respond, first, to the complaint submitted by it
representative in Mauritania , an expert's report on the first     to DG IV on 27 July 1994 criticizing the steps taken by the
batch of bottles was drawn up . The applicant maintains that        PSA Group in relation to the Peugeot concessionaires of its