CELEX: C2002/044/43
Language: en
Date: 2002-02-16 00:00:00
Title: Case T-300/01: Action brought on 7 December 2001 by Carlo De Nicola against European Investment Bank

C 44/24                 EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                      16.2.2002
Action brought on 7 December 2001 by Carlo De Nicola                       —     implied refusal to initiate disciplinary proceedings, in that
              against European Investment Bank                                   it was only by letter of 13 June 2001 that the President
                                                                                 of the EIB informed the applicant of the misconduct and
                                                                                 infringements alleged against him, dating back to 1998.
                          (Case T-300/01)                                        Such delay moreover is in breach of the employee’s rights
                                                                                 of defence;
                           (2002/C 44/43)                                  —     that the Disciplinary Board was irregularly constituted.
                                                                                 The applicant claims in that respect that Article 40 of the
                                                                                 Staff Regulations is unlawful inasmuch as it does not
                    (Language of the case: Italian)                              provide in any event for the substitution of the Head of
                                                                                 Personnel, despite the existence of a dispute between him
                                                                                 and the applicant, and inasmuch as there is no provision
                                                                                 requiring a quorum of 4 voting members;
An action against the European Investment Bank was brought                 —     infringement of the procedure provided for in Article 40
before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities                   of the Staff Regulations;
on 7 December 2001 by Carlo De Nicola, represented by Luigi
Isola, lawyer.                                                             —     irregularity of the verbal dismissal of 6 September 2001,
                                                                                 inasmuch as such dismissal is not provided for by any
                                                                                 Community or other provision, and it was moreover
                                                                                 intimated by the Director of the Rome office, whereas the
The applicant claims that the Court should:                                      Staff Regulations accords this power only to the President
                                                                                 of the EIB;
—     annul the verbal dismissal of 6 September 2001 notified
      to the applicant by Thomas Beckett, the director of the              —     irregularity of the dismissal of 12 September 2001. The
      Rome office, the subsequent dismissal served on the                        applicant points out in that respect that the misconduct
      applicant by letter received on 12 September 2001,                         leading to the disciplinary measure is certainly not held
      signed by the President of the European Investment                         to be serious since the President, by virtue of Article 39
      Bank (EIB), Philippe Maystadt, together with all other                     of the Staff Regulations, could have immediately sus-
      consequent and related acts, including necessarily certain                 pended the official. Furthermore, the defendant made
      articles of the Staff Regulations and the Code of Conduct,                 hardly any mention of specific times and places nor
      in so far as the latter applies to the applicant;                          adduced evidence of the misconduct but instead sought
                                                                                 to dismiss him for failure to cooperate during the
                                                                                 disciplinary proceedings despite his never having been
—     order the EIB to reinstate the applicant, restore his career               accused of such failure.
      as from February 1999 and pay the remuneration due to
      him in the meantime (together with interest) and pay the
      costs of the proceedings and damages in the terms set out            (1) Judgment of 23 February 2001 ECR-SC 2001 I-A-49, II-185.
      below and to be further expounded in the course of                   (2) OJ 2001 C 227, p. 30.
      proceedings.
Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                           Action brought on 30 November 2001 by Alitalia —
                                                                           Linee aeree italiane S.p.A. against the Commission of the
The applicant in the present action, who is challenging his                                    European Communities
dismissal by the defendant and the facts surrounding it, is the
same one as in T-7/98, T-208/98 and T-109/99 De Nicola v
EIB (1) and T-120/01 De Nicola v EIB (2).                                                           (Case T-301/01)
                                                                                                     (2002/C 44/44)
In support of his arguments, the applicant claims:
                                                                                              (Language of the case: Italian)
—     that the Code of Conduct does not apply to him,
      inasmuch as it is a unilateral act drawn up and issued
      solely by the employer, not being required by the
      individual contract of employment or by the Staff Regu-              An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
      lations;                                                             ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the