CELEX: C1997/181/33
Language: en
Date: 1997-06-14 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 7 April 1997 by Réa Apostilidis against the Court of Justice of the European Communities (Case T-86/97)

14 . 6 . 97            EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                  No C 181 / 17
     ' interested party' in relation to all aspects of an anti­        The contested decision appears to be based solely on
     dumping proceeding concerning imports of unbleached               Article 6 ( 12 ) of the International GATT Anti-dumping
     cotton fabrics, originating in the People 's Republic of          Code. This justification is irrelevant to the applicant's
     China, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Pakistan and Turkey               rights under Community law and constitutes a
     and not allowing the applicant to inspect the                     misinterpretation of the Anti-dumping Code itself. The
     Commission        non-confidential      documents       and       applicant's request is based in fact on the clear wording of
     information made available by all the parties in that             the EC anti-dumping regulations and not the GATT
     proceeding,                                                       provisions . It is true that consumer associations are in
                                                                       principle not included in the list of ' interested parties' set
                                                                       out in the GATT rules . However, this list does not
— declare void, pursuant to Articles 173 and 174 of the
     EC Treaty, the decision contained in the same letter, in          preclude GATT Members from allowing other parties to
     so far as that decision refuses to allow the applicant            become interested parties . The EC has in fact made use of
     and other consumer organizations to have access to                this possibility Regulation ( EC ) No 384/96 . Articles 6 and
     the non-confidential information made available in an             21 of that Regulation should therefore be regarded as
     anti-dumping proceeding dealing with products non­                constituting a correct implementation of GATT rules as
     commonly sold at a retail level,                                  regards access of consumer organizations to non­
                                                                       confidential information in relation to all elements of anti­
                                                                       dumping proceedings, including dumping, injury and
— make any additional orders which the Court considers                 causality.
     necessary, and
                                                                       (') Regulation ( EC ) No 384/96 , of 22 December 1995 , on
— order the Commission to pay the costs of the                             protection against dumped imports from Countries not
                                                                           Members of the European Community ( OJ No L 56 , 6 . 3 .
     proceedings .                                                         1996 ).
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
The applicant in the present case, a representative
international consumer organization whose object is the
promotion of the interest of consumers in relation to the              Action brought on 7 April 1997 by Rea Apostilidis against
policies of the European Union and the representation of                     the Court of Justice of the European Communities
consumer organizations, challenges the decision of the                                         ( Case T-86./97 )
Commission not to recognize it as an interested party, and
not to allow it to have access to all non-confidential                                           ( 97/C 181 /33 )
documents and information made available in an anti­
dumping proceeding concerning imports of unbleached                                    (Language of the case: French)
cotton fabrics, originating in the People 's Republic of
China, Egypt, India , Indonesia, Pakistan and Turkey and               An action against the Court of Justice of the European
in any other anti-dumping proceeding dealing with                      Communities was brought before the Court of First
products non-commonly sold at a retail level . According               Instance of the European Communities on 7 April 1997
to the applicant, the Commission justifies its decision on             by Rea Apostilidis, residing at Bereldange ( Luxembourg ),
the basis of the premise that the GATT Anti-dumping                    represented by Alain Levy, of the Paris Bar, with an
Code allows consumers the opportunity to provide                       address for service in Luxembourg care of the applicant,
information on dumping, injury and causality only ' in                 46 Route de Luxembourg, Bereldange .
cases where the product is commonly sold at the retail
level '.                                                               The applicant claims that the Court should:
The applicant claims to be an interested party on the basis            — annul the contested decisions,
of Council Regulation No 384/96 (').
                                                                       — order the destruction of the documents contained in
                                                                            the parallel file,
It claims first of all that Article 6 ( 7) and Article 21 of
that regulation recognize consumer associations as
interested parties and grant them the opportunity to access            — order the Court of Justice to pay her compensation in
                                                                            the    sum  of Bfrs     1 000 000     for the non-material
the non-confidential files of the proceeding. The regulation
should not limit the right of consumer organizations to                     damage suffered by her,
participate fully in anti-dumping proceedings to 'products
commonly sold at retail level'. It submits, therefore, that            — order the Court of Justice to pay the costs.
although this particular proceeding does concern products
which are not commonly sold at retail level , it should                Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
have the        opportunity to have      access to the non­
confidential     file in   relation  to  all  elements    of  the      The applicant, a grade A 6 official, contests the decision
proceeding. Should this not be the case, a representative              of the appointing authority to suspend the procedure for
consumer organization would not be able to participate                 filling one of the three posts of principal administrator
fully in the evaluation of the Community interest in any                advertised in Vacancy Notice No CJ 91 /95 , for which she
particular anti-dumping investigation .                                 had applied, as well as the decision rejecting the complaint
 ---pagebreak--- No C 181 / 18        EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                   14 . 6 . 97
lodged against the former decision . She points out in that          The applicant claims that the Court should:
regard that the competent director had proposed her
appointment to one of those three posts. Having filled two           — annul the Commission's decision of 12 June 1996
of the posts in question, the appointing authority adopted                rejecting the applicant's request that it give
the contested decision in consequence of the opening of an                consideration to the possible application of
investigation prompted by complaints .                                    Article 31 ( 2 ) of the Staff Regulations,
She advances the following pleas in support of her claims :
                                                                     — annul , in so far as may be necessary, the decision
                                                                          adopted by the Commission on 27 December 1996
— infringement of the provisions of Article 26 of the
                                                                          expressly rejecting the applicant's complaint,
    Staff Regulations and of Articles 6 and 10 of the
    European Convention for the Protection of Human
    Rights, in that the appointing authority took a                  — order the defendant to pay all the costs.
    decision which seriously affected her administrative
    situation on the basis of facts and documents which              Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
    had not been placed on her personal file and which
    had not been communicated to her,
                                                                     The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as in
                                                                     Case T- 16/9 7 ( ] ).
— absence of any legal basis for the suspension decision,
    inasmuch as there exists no provision allowing for the           (') OJ No C 74, 8 . 3 . 1997, p . 27.
    possible suspension by the appointing authority, on
    any grounds whatever, of a procedure for promotion
    by way of application for a post which has been
    declared vacant,
— contradictory reasoning and manifest error of
    assessment. The applicant observes in that regard that           Action brought on 7 April 1997 by Susanne Nikolajsen
    the investigation is being conducted on the basis of                against the Commission of the European Communities
    acts committed by persons unknown, for which the                                           ( Case T-98/97 )
    applicant cannot, therefore, be held responsible to the
    extent of justifying the suspension of the procedure in                                     ( 97/C 181 /35 )
    issue . A decision based on facts which have not yet
    been established must necessarily arise from irregular                           (Language of the case: French)
    reasoning,
                                                                     An action against the Commission oj the European
— absence of a statement of reasons for the initial                  Communities was brought before the Court of First
    decision of the appointing authority, in that, although          Instance of the European Communities on 7 April 1997
    the reasons for rejecting an application for a post do           by Susanne Nikolajsen, residing in Brussels, represented by
    not have to be given until the stage when the                    Nicolas Lhoest, of the Brussels Bar, with an address for
    complaint is rejected, the position must be different            service in Luxembourg at the offices of Fiduciaire Myson
    where the appointing authority decides to suspend the            Sari , 30 Rue de Cessange .
    procedure for filling a post which has been declared
    vacant ,
                                                                     The applicant claims that the Court should:
— abuse of process and misuse of powers .
                                                                     — annul the Commission 's decision of 9 October 1996
                                                                          rejecting the applicant's request that it give
                                                                          consideration to the possible application of
                                                                          Article 31 ( 2 ) of the Staff Regulations,
Action brought on 7 April 1997 by Jacques Verborgh                   — annul, in so far as may be necessary, the decision
  against the Commission of the European Communities                      adopted by the Commission on 27 December 1996
                       ( Case T-91 /97 )                                  expressly rejecting the applicant's complaint,
                         ( 97/C 181 /34 )
                                                                     — order the defendant to pay all the costs .
               (Language of the case: French)
                                                                     Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
An action against the Commission of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First                    The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as in
Instance of the European Communities on 7 April 1997                 Case T-16/97 ( M.
by Jacques Verborgh, residing at Aalter ( Belgium ),
represented by Nicolas Lhoest, of the Brussels Bar, with an          O OJ No C 74 , 8 . 3 . 1997, p . 27 .
address for service in Luxembourg at the offices of
Fiduciaire Myson Sari , 30 Rue de Cessange.