CELEX: C2003/070/43
Language: en
Date: 2003-03-22 00:00:00
Title: Case T-11/03: Action brought on 15 January 2003 by Mrs Elizabeth Afari against the European Central Bank

22.3.2003              EN                          Official Journal of the European Union                                          C 70/27
Action brought on 15 January 2003 by Mrs Elizabeth                         —     Violation of the principle of proportionality as to the
           Afari against the European Central Bank                               penalty.
                                                                           —     Violation of the Council Directive 2000/43 of 29 June
                         (Case T-11/03)
                                                                                 2000 implementing the principle of equal treament
                                                                                 between persons irrespective of racial and ethnic
                         (2003/C 70/43)                                          origin (1).
                   (Language of the case: English)                         (1 ) Official Journal L 180, of 19.7.2000, p. 22.
An action against the European Central Bank was brought
before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities
on 15 January 2003 by Mrs Elizabeth Afari, Frankfurt,
Germany, represented by Mr Georges Vandersanden and                        Action brought on 16 January 2003 by Nintendo Co., Ltd.
Mr Laure Levi, Lawyers.                                                    and Nintendo of Europe GmbH against the Commission
                                                                                              of the European Communities
The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                                                       (Case T-13/03)
—     annul the disciplinary decision of the ECB of 5 November
      2002 imposing on the Appellant a written reprimand;                                             (2003/C 70/44)
—     order that the ECB pays 1 euro as compensation for the                                    (Language of the case: English)
      moral predudice;
—     order that the ECB pays the costs.
                                                                           An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
                                                                           ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
                                                                           European Communities on 16 January 2003 by Nintendo
                                                                           Co., Ltd., Kyoto, Japan and Nintendo of Europe GmbH,
Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                           Großostheim, Germany, represented by Mr Ian Forrester, QC,
                                                                           Mr John Pheasant, Solicitor, Mr Mark Powell, Solicitor,
The Appellant in the present case challenges the decision of               Ms Ciara Kennedy-Loest, Solicitor and Mr James Killick,
the defendant’s Administration imposing on her a disciplinary              Barrister.
measure consisting of a written reprimand. The main charges
against her were that she made allegations of racism and                   The applicant claims that the Court should:
accused members of the management of the ECB of encourag-
ing xenophobia.                                                            —     annul Article 3 of the decision to the extent that it
                                                                                 imposes an unlawfully large fine on Nintendo;
She complains that at the beginning of this disciplinary                   —     set a lower fine (if any) in such amount as may appear
procedure there was a difficult relationship with a colleague                    appropriate to the Court in the exercise of its unlimited
who put her under very strong pressure, harassment and                           discretion pursuant to Article 229 EC;
discriminated against her in many ways. The conflict escalated
to a written complaint, as she unsuccessfully called the                   —     order the Commission to pay the applicant’s costs
attention of her management on that situation.
                                                                           —     take such other or further steps as justice may require
The Appellant invokes the following as pleas in law:
—     Violation of the duty to state reasons, of the right to good         Pleas in law and main arguments
      administration and of the obligation of due care.
                                                                           The applicants contest the decision of the Commission decision
—     Violation of the rights of defense, in so far as the burden
                                                                           C(2002) 4072 final of 30 October 2002 in Cases COMP/
      of the proof would have been illegally put on the
                                                                           35.587 PO Video games, COMP/35.706 PO Nintendo Distri-
      applicant’s shoulders and her right to be heard, as well as
                                                                           bution and COMP/36.321 Omega-Nintendo, regarding an
      the principle of impartiality, would have been ignored.
                                                                           infringement of Article 81 (1) of the EC Treaty insofar as it
                                                                           imposes an unlawfully large fine on the applicants.
—     Manifest error of appreciation in relation to the substance
      of the case. Concretely, it is submitted that the applicant
      has violated neither Article 4(1) of Conditions of Employ-           In support of their application, the applicants claim that the
      ment for Staff of the ECB, nor the ECB Code of Conduct.              Commission has infringed essential procedural requirements