CELEX: C2002/068/32
Language: en
Date: 2002-03-16 00:00:00
Title: Case T-2/02: Action brought on 10 January 2002 by Guillermo Balmori Abella against the Commission of the European Communities

C 68/18                EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                     16.3.2002
Action brought on 27 December 2001 by Colette di                         Action brought on 10 January 2002 by Guillermo Balmori
Marzio against Commission of the European Com-                           Abella against the Commission of the European Com-
                             munities                                                                 munities
                         (Case T-335/01)                                                           (Case T-2/02)
                          (2002/C 68/31)
                                                                                                  (2002/C 68/32)
                   (Language of the case: French)
                                                                                            (Language of the case: Spanish)
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the               An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
European Communities on 27 December 2001 by Colette di                   ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
Marzio, residing in Ginasservis (France), represented by Georg-          European Communities on 10 January 2002 by Guillermo
es Vandersanden Laure Levi, lawyers.                                     Balmori Abella, residing in Madrid, represented by Valentı́n
                                                                         Playá Serra, lawyer.
The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                         The applicant claims that the Court should:
—     annul the decision of 18 July 2001, notified on 5 Septem-
      ber 2001, annulling and replacing a decision of 4 January
      2001 with the same purpose of transferring the applicant,          —     annul notice of open competition COM/A/12/01 for
      within the same Directorate General (Directorate General                 the constitution of a reserve for the recruitment of
      for Personnel and Administration) from the External                      administrators in the field of the management of property,
      Security Unit in the Protocol and Security Services                      logistics and operations, issued by the Commission of the
      Directorate to the Information Systems and Informatics                   European Communities on 23 October 2001.
      Infrastructure Unit of the Directorate General for
      Resources, entailing a change of place of work from
      Cadarache in France to Brussels, annul, in so far as
      necessary, the decision of 4 January 2001 and annul the
      decision rejecting the applicant’s complaint, taken on             Pleas in law and main arguments
      17 September 2001;
—     order the defendant to pay damages with interest assessed,
      ex æquo et bono, provisionally, at EUR 25 000;                     The applicant is challenging notice of open competition
                                                                         COM/A/12/01 (1), inasmuch as it states, in point III(B), headed
                                                                         ‘Special conditions’, that ‘candidates must have been born after
—     order the defendant to pay the entire costs.                       30 November 1955’. The applicant claims that that provision
                                                                         imposes discriminatory conditions based on age, since the age-
                                                                         limit is not justified by any special characteristic of the posts
                                                                         to be filled which might suggest that the work could not be
Pleas in law and main arguments                                          carried out by persons in the group discriminated against.
                                                                         Consequently, that condition is in breach of the European
                                                                         Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Funda-
                                                                         mental Freedoms (Articles 5, 8 and 14), which the European
In support of her application, the applicant alleges disregard           Union has undertaken to respect (Article 6(2) of the Treaty on
for the interests of the service, manifest error of assessment           European Union), as well as Article 13 of the EC Treaty and
and breach of the principle to have regard for the welfare of            the case-law of the Court of Justice. The applicant further
officials and of the general principle of respect for privacy and        states that, in addition to being illegal, such discrimination is
family life. Finally, the applicant claims that the principle of         gravely prejudicial to workers aged over 45, since that
good management and sound administration and the principle               approach on the part of the Community institutions helps to
to have regard for the welfare of officials have been infringed.         create a bias against the recruitment of those workers.
According to the applicant, the contested decision takes no
account whatever of her personal interests and of her family
situation. Nor was the transfer decided in the interests of the
service. The applicant claims rather that her transfer is the            (1) OJ 2001 C 269 A, p. 13.
result of a tussle over posts between the services concerned.