CELEX: C1996/388/20
Language: en
Date: 1996-12-21 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 4 November 1996 by Cornelis Volger against the European Parliament (Case T-176/96)

No c 388/ 10           Len                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                    21 . 12 . 96
      at all correspond to the qualifications and competence              defendant observes that Article 6 of Annex V to the Staff
      acquired in her previous post.                                      Regulations uses in this regard the expression ' may' grant,
                                                                          and that consequently, in so far as that provision gives it a
She further considers that the decision in question caused                discretion, it does not confer any right on officials to
her material damage, first, because her chances of                        special leave in the event of a serious illness of a child. In
promotion are greatly reduced as a result of her transfer                 stating its reasons for refusing her application, the
and, secondly, because the aforementioned health                          Commission also refers to internal directives requiring the
problems entail an additional financial burden for her.                   applicant to submit medical certificates attesting to a
                                                                          serious illness .
The applicant concludes that the Commission's liability is
thereby established and that it must make good the                        The applicant argues in the first place that, apart from
damage caused.                                                            annual leave, which is an automatic entitlement, the Staff
                                                                          Regulations provide for special leave which must be
                                                                          granted in so far as the conditions for entitlement thereto
As regards the delay in drawing up her staff report for the               are fulfilled and the official applies for it. Accordingly, the
period 1991 to 1993 , the applicant observes that the draft               expressions ' may be granted ' or 'may grant' do not mean
report was not presented to her until 13 September 1995 ,                 that the institution has a discretion in the matter, but
and then only after she had formally required the                         simply declares that it has the legal capacity to grant such
appointing authority to fulfil its duties towards her. In                 leave .
consequence of that delay, it was not possible for her to be
taken into consideration by the Promotion Committee
when considering promotions from one career bracket to                    As far as the internal directives are concerned, the
another for 1994 and 1995 . The delay thus adversely                      applicant categorically denies that they may be relied upon
affected her legitimate expectations and rights in respect                against her. She is completely ignorant of those directives.
of promotions and the defendant should make good the                      What is more, the Commission has not provided her with
material damage arising therefrom.                                        any information which would enable her to identify them
                                                                          or refer to them . Accordingly, she does not know which
                                                                          authority adopted those directives or under what
f 1 ) Case T-78/96 , OJ No C 233 , 19 . 8 . 1996 , p. 12 .
                                                                          procedure they were issued. By the same token, she does
                                                                          not know what the legal force of those directives may be .
Action brought on 29 October 1996 by Teresa Maria
Rodrigues Gomes De Oliveira against the Commission of                     Action brought on 4 November 1996 by Cornelis Volger
                     the European Communities                                            against the European Parliament
                          ( Case T-173 /96 )
                                                                                                   Case T-l 76/96 )
                            ( 96/C 388/ 19 )
                                                                                                   ( 96/C 388/20 )
                  (Language of the case: French)                                            (Language of the case: French)
An action against the Commission of the European                          An action against the European Parliament was brought
Communities was brought before the Court of First                         hefore the Court of First Instance of the European
Instance of the European Communities on 29 October                        Communities on 4 November 1996 by Cornelis Volger,
 1996 by Teresa Maria Rodrigues Gomes De Oliveira,                        resident at Heffingen ( Luxembourg ), represented by Jean­
resident in Luxembourg, represented by Alain Lorang, of                   Noel Louis, Thierry Demaseure And Ariane Tornel, of the
the Luxembourg Bar, with an address for service at his                    Brussels Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at
Chambers, 51 Rue Albert l er.                                             Fiduciaire Myson Sari, 30 Rue de Cessange .
The applicant claims that the Court should:                               The applicant claims that the Court should :
— annul the decision of the Commission,                                   — annul the decision of 1 December 1995 assigning the
                                                                               applicant to non-active status with effect from the
— order the Commission to pay the costs .                                      evening of 30 November 1995 and all subsequent
                                                                               decisions relating thereto, in particular the decision no
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                            longer to pay him the remuneration and the
                                                                               allowances to which he is entitled,
The applicant, an official of grade LA 6 , challenges the
appointing authority's refusal to grant her three days'                   — annul, in so far as necessary,              the decision of
special leave, corresponding to the period covered by three                    3 September 1996 fixing 1 February 1996 as the date
medical certificates relating to a serious illness of her two                  on which the aforementioned decision took effect,
children which stressed the need for the mother to remain
with them . In the decision refusing her request, the                     — order the defendant to pay the costs.
 ---pagebreak--- 21 . 12 . 96          I EN I              Official Journal of the European Communities                                 No C 388/ 11
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                            Removal from the register of T-31/96 ( ] )
                                                                                                ( 96/C 388/21
The applicant contests the appointing authority's decision                          (Language of the case: French)
dated 1 December 1995 and notified on 27 December
1995 by which he was assigned non-active status,                     By order of 6 November 1996 the President of the Third
backdated to 30 November 1995 and granted the                        Chamber, Extended Composition, of the Court of First
allowance provided for in Annex IV to the Staff                      Instance of the European Communities has ordered the
Regulations. By way of subsequent related decisions, he              removal from the register of Case T-31/96 : Credit
also contests the decision, notified by letter of 21 February        Lyonnais v. Commission of the European ' Communities.
1996 , to withhold Lfrs 71 484 from the allowance granted
pursuant to Article 41 of the Staff Regulations and the              (!) OJ No C 133 , 4 . 5 . 1996 .
related decision to stop, with effect from 1 December
1995 , the remuneration and allowances to which he is
entitled .
                                                                               Removal from the register of T-70/96 (')
The applicant argues in the first place in support of his                                         96/C 388/22 )
claims that Articles 25 and 41 of the Staff Regulations
have been infringed. He contends that, under the principle                        (Language of the case: Portuguese)
of legal certainty of legal situations, the starting point of a      By order of 12 November 1996 the President of the
Community measure may not be set at a date prior to its              Second Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the
publication. As far as the matter at issue is concerned, late        European Communities has ordered the removal from the
notification of assignment to non-active status prevents             register of Case T-70/96 : Mediocurso, Estabelecimento de
the appointing authority from considering the official's             Ensino Particular, Limitada          v.    Commission of the
priority for reinstatement in any post of his grade which            European Communities.
may fall vacant or be created and for which he has the
necessary qualifications .                                           (!) OJ No C 210, 20 . 7. 1996 .
In addition, the statement of reasons of the contested
decision does not enable either the applicant or the Court
of First Instance to check whether the budgetary authority
                                                                               Removal from the register of T-72/96 (*)
extended the possibilities for the application of Article 41
of the Staff Regulations to the 1996 financial year in                                          ( 96/C 388/23
accordance with the rules set out in Article 220 et seq. of                       (Language of the case: Portuguese)
the EC Treaty.
                                                                     By order of 12 November 1996 the President of the
                                                                     Second Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the
In his application, the applicant also claims that there has         European Communities has ordered the removal from the
been an infringement of the duty to have regard to                   register of Case T-72/96 : Mediocurso, Estabelecimento de
officials ' interest.                                                Ensino Particular, Limitada v. Commission of the
                                                                     European Communities.
                                                                     (!) OJ No C 210, 20 . 7. 1996 .