You are on page 1of 1

15.8.

98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 258/13

Appeal brought on 17 April 1998 by SocieÂte GueÂrin Luxembourg at the Chambers of Louis Schiltz, 2 Rue du
Automobiles EURL against the order delivered on Fort Rheinsheim.
13 February 1998 by the Third Chamber of the Court of
First Instance of the European Communities in Case
T-276/97 between SocieÂte GueÂrin Automobiles EURL and The appellant claims that the Court should:
the Commission of the European Communities
(Case C-154/98 P) set aside the order made on 13 February 1998 by the First
Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European
(98/C 258/23) Communities in Case T-195/96 Alexopoulou v
Commission of the European Communities (1), by which it
dismissed the action brought by the appellant;
An appeal against the judgment delivered on 13 February
1998 by the Third Chamber of the Court of First Instance make the following declarations and rulings, as the Court
of the European Communities in Case T-276/97 between of First Instance should have done:
SocieÂte GueÂrin Automobiles EURL and the Commission of
the European Communities was brought before the Court
of Justice of the European Communities on 17 April 1998 Ð annul the Decision of the appointing authority
by SocieÂte GueÂrin Automobiles EURL, represented by rejecting the applicant's request, classifying her in
Jean-Claude Fourgous, of the Paris and Brussels Bar, with Grade A7, step 5, and implicitly refusing to appoint
an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of her to grade A6;
Pierrot Schiltz, 4 Rue BeÂatrix de Bourbon.
Ð annul the decision of the appointing authority of
28 August 1996 rejecting the appellant's request of
The appellant claims that the Court should:
3 April 1996;

Ð set aside the Order of the Court of First Instance of Ð order the appointing authority to pay to the appellant
the European Communities of 13 February 1998; the sum of BFR 250 000 by way of provisional
compensation for the damage suffered by her as a
result of the loss of her chances of promotion to grade
Ð orders the Commission to pay the costs. A5; order the appointing authority to calculate the
salary which the appellant would have received if she
had been promoted to grade A5 with effect from
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support: 1 December 1995; and order it to pay the amount
thus calculated, together with default interest from
1 December 1995, subject to deduction therefrom of
the sum of BFR 250 000 claimed above;
The pleas in law and main arguments are identical with
those in Case C-153/98 P.
Ð orders the appointing authority to pay all the costs,
including those relating to the proceedings at first
instance.

Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
Appeal brought on 21 April 1998 by Spyridoula
Alexopoulou against the Order made on 13 February Ð Failure to provide a statement of reasons and
1998 by the First Chamber of the Court of First Instance infringement of Article 111 of the Rules of Procedure
of the European Communities in Case T-195/96 between of the Court of First Instance: it is not possible to
Spyridoula Alexopoulou and the Commission of the deduce from the scheme of the contested order the
European Communities reasons for which the Court of First Instance held that
the action was manifestly' unfounded, or to tell
(Case C-155/98 P)
whether the Court of First Instance intended to dismiss
(98/C 258/24) it as unfounded or as inadmissible. The order does not
state that the views of the Advocate General were
heard. Lastly, it deals jointly with the issues of
classification and promotion, without stating any
An appeal against the Order made on 13 February 1998 reasons for so doing.
by the First Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities in Case T-195/96 between
Spyridoula Alexopoulou and the Commission of the Ð Failure to take full account of Article 31 of the Staff
European Communities was brought before the Court of Regulations of Officials: by adding a two fold
Justice of the European Communities on 21 April 1998 by criterion governing exceptions to Article 31, the
Spyridoula Alexopoulou, represented by Olivier Slusny, of contested order purported to lay down, as a matter of
the Brussels Bar, with an address for service in law, conditions which that article does not contain.