You are on page 1of 2

C 258/36 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 15.8.

98

ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT 1. The application is dismissed as inadmissible.
OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
of 26 June 1998 2. There is no need to adjudicate on the application to
in Case T-262/97 R: Anthony Goldstein v Commission of intervene.
the European Communities
(Application for interim measures Ð Inadmissibility) 3. The applicant is ordered to pay the defendant's costs.

(98/C 258/64) (1) OJ C 370 of 6.12.1997.

(Language of the case: English)

In Case T-262/97 R: Anthony Goldstein, residing in
London, represented by Raymond St John Murphy,
Action brought on 9 June 1998 by Interporc Im- und
Solicitor, against Commission of the European
Export GmbH against the Commission of the European
Communities (Agent: Richard Lyal) Ð application for
Communities
interim measures in connection with a decision of the
Commission refusing to adopt interim measures sought by (Case T-92/98)
the applicant Ð the President of the Court of First (98/C 258/66)
Instance made an order on 26 June 1998, the operative
part of which is as follows:
(Language of the case: German)

1. The application for interim measures is dismissed.
An action against the Commission of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First
2. The applicant shall pay the costs of the interlocutory Instance of the European Communities on 9 June 1998 by
proceedings. Interporc Im- und Export GmbH, Hamburg (Germany),
represented by Georg M. Berrisch, Rechtsanwalt, of
Messrs Schön Nolte Finkelnburg & Clemm, 33 Rue PeÁre
de Deken, Brussels.

The applicant claims that the Court should:
ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
of 25 May 1998 Ð annul the contested decision;

in Case T-267/97: Broome & Wellington Ltd v
Commission of the European Communities (1) Ð alternatively, annul the contested decision in so far as
the applicant has not already received, in the context
(Action for annulment Ð Notice of initiation of an anti- of the proceedings in Case T-50/96, the documents to
dumping proceeding Ð Inadmissibility) which it has requested access;
(98/C 258/65)
Ð order the Commission to pay the costs of the present
proceedings in any event.
(Language of the case: English)

Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
In Case T-267/97: Broome & Wellington Ltd, having its
registered office in Manchester (United Kingdom),
represented by Fiona M. Carlin, Barrister, of the Northern The applicant refers, with regard to the previous history of
Ireland Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at this matter, to Case T-124/96 Interporc Im- und Export
the offices of Arendt and Medernach, 8-10 Rue Mathias GmbH v Commission (1). By judgment delivered in that
Hardt, against Commission of the European Communities case on 6 February 1998 (2), the Court inter alia annulled
(Agents: Viktor Kreuschitz and Nicholas Khan) Ð the Commission's decision of 29 May 1996 refusing the
application for the annulment of a notice of initiation of applicant access to certain documents held by that
an anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of institution.
unbleached cotton fabrics originating in the People's
Republic of China, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Pakistan and By its claim in the present action, the applicant contests
Turkey, published on 11 July 1997 (OJ C 210 of the fresh refusal to grant access to documents held by the
20.7.1996, p. 12) Ð the Court of First Instance (Third Commission.
Chamber, Extended Composition), composed of: V. Tiili,
President, C. P. BrieÈt, K. Lenaerts, A. Potocki and J. D.
Cooke, Judges; H. Jung, Registrar, made an order on In the contested decision, the Secretary-General of the
25 May 1998, the operative part of which is as follows: Commission classifies the documents requested as falling
15.8.98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 258/37

into the following groups: (1) documents prepared by the The applicant claims that the Court should:
Member States and by the Argentinian authorities and (2)
Commission documents. Ð declare the action admissible;

As regards the documents in the first of those groups, the Ð annul the decision of the examining jury in
applicant is recommended to request copies of the competition COM/A/17/96 not to include him in the
documents in question direct from the Member States list of successful candidates, together with the decision
and from the authorities concerned. According to the of the competent Commission authority approving and
Commission, the documents in the second group are the ratifying that list, the tacit rejection of administrative
subject of pending legal proceedings (3) and consequently complaint R/056/98, and all further implementing acts
fall within the exception relating to protection of the by the Commission;
public interest, and in particular the proper conduct of
court proceedings, for which express provision is made in
Ð order the Commission to pay the applicant BFR
the Code of Conduct.
300 000 in respect of non-material injury;

In that regard, the applicant pleads as follows in its
Ð order the Commission to pay all the costs.
application:
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
As to point (1):
The applicant relies on multiple infringements of the rules
The Commission may not refuse to give access to a
of law governing the conduct of competitions for the
document on the ground that its author is not the
recruitment of staff of the European Communities which
Commission. Refusal to grant access to the documents
are alleged to have occurred during the course of internal
concerned cannot be justified by relying on the
competition COM/17/96 for transfer form Grade B to
corresponding provision of the Code of Conduct. Thus the
Grade A, in which he was a candidate. According to the
contested decision infringes both Decision 94/90/ECSC,
applicant, the infringements in question entail the nullity
EC, Euratom and the Code of Conduct. The applicant
of the competition, and also give grounds for a claim for
pleads, in the alternative, that the contested decision
compensation. The infringements in question are the
infringes Article 190 of the EC Treaty, since it does not
following:
contain an adequate statement of the reasons on which it
is based.
Ð Infringement of the principle of equal treatment of
candidates
As to point (2):
At the outset the applicant alleges a threefold
In the applicant's view, the contested decision is void,
infringement of the fundamental requirement of equal
since it infringes Decision 94/90/ECSC, EC, Euratom and
treatment of candidates in competitions for the
the Code of Conduct. The application is based, in the
recruitment of officials.
alternative, on infringement of Article 176 of the EC
Treaty in conjunction with the judgment in Case T-124/96 (a) Infringement on the grounds of the variable
and infringement of Article 190 of the EC Treaty. composition of the examining jury during the oral
tests and the stage-by-stage appraisal.
(1) OJ C 318 of 26.10.1996, p. 14.
(2) Not yet published in the European Court Reports. (b) Infringement of the principle of equal treatment on
(3) Case T-50/96 Primex Produkte Import und Export and Others
linguistic grounds/discrimination based on
v Commission, currently pending (OJ C 180 of 22.6.1996,
p. 33).
nationality.

(c) Infringement on the ground of different treatment
of the candidates in regard to the fourth criterion
(drafting aptitude).

Ð Infringement of the principle of leniency and of the
Action brought on 30 June 1998 by Christos Gogos
general rules governing the grading of competitions.
against the Commission of the European Communities
(Case T-95/98)
Ð Infringement of Article 27 of the Staff Regulations of
(98/C 258/67) Officials.

An action against the Commission of the European Ð Infringement of Article 3 of Annex III to the Staff
Communities was brought before the Court of First Regulations.
Instance of the European Communities on 30 June 1998
by Christos Gogos, a Grade B5 official with the Ð Infringement of the rules governing notice of the
Commission, represented by Professor Chary Tagara, of competition.
the Athens Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg
at the Chambers of Evelyn Korn, 21 Rue Nassau, L-2213.