You are on page 1of 2

24.10.

98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 327/27

which the Commission must observe when it adopts economics and part of the professional experience when
administrative measures. classifying him.

Although the directive on higher-education diplomas (1)


does not bind the Community institutions directly, it
would nevertheless be paradoxical if those institutions
placed a different meaning on higher-education diploma'
Action brought on 8 June 1998 by Jürgen Wettig against
and thereby disregarded the objectives and provisions of
the Commission of the European Communities
the directive.
(Case T-91/98)
(98/C 327/49) (1) Council Directive 89/48/EEC, (OJ L 19, 24.1.1989, p. 16).

(Language of the case: German)

An action against the Commission of the European


Communities was brought before the Court of First
Instance of the European Communities on 8 June 1998 by Action brought on 30 June 1998 by Anthony Goldstein
Jürgen Wettig, of Brussels, Belgium, represented by Peter against the Commission of the European Communities
Wiesner, Rechtsanwalt, Cologne, Germany, with an
address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Dr (Case T-100/98)
Johannes Henricus Van Vliet, 49 Rue Glesener.
(98/C 327/50)

The applicant claims that the Court should:


(Language of the case: English)

Ð annul the decision of the defendant of 5 November


1997 definitively classifying him in Step 1 of Grade
A 5 from 1 October 1996; An action against the Commission of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First
Instance of the European Communities on 30 June 1998
Ð order the defendant to classify him in Step 2 of his by Anthony Goldstein, represented by Raymond St John
current grade retroactively from 1 October 1996; Murphy, Merriman White, 3, King's Bench Walk, Inner
Temple, London EC4Y 7DJ, United Kingdom.

Ð order the defendant to pay the costs.


The applicant claims that the Court should:
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:

Ð declare the Commission in breach of Council Directive


The applicant, a graduate of the Fachhochschule für 84/450/EEC (1) to the extent that the Citizens First
Finanzen (higher education establishment specialising in Factsheet on the Recognition of Diplomas and
finance) of the Land of North Rhine-Westphalia, has been Qualifications of General and Specialist Doctors in the
working as a member of the Commission's temporary staff United Kingdom misrepresents the rules applicable to
(in Directorate E of Directorate General XI) since specialist medical practitioners in the United Kingdom
1 October 1996. In accordance with clause 3 of his in order to promote the supply of specialist medical
contract of employment, he was classified in Step 1 of services by a category of medical practitioners who are
Grade A 5. not qualified by law to practise the regulated medical
profession as licensed specialist medical practitioners
and who have not completed the prescribed specialist
The applicant contends that when he took up his duties he medical training at Community level and national
already had more than 16 years' professional experience level and thereby do not offer the minimum safeguards
which was to be taken into account. Nevertheless, in required by Community law for practising a medical
breach of his right to be classified in the appropriate (or specialty regulated by Community law as a specialist
definitive') step, the initial classification was retained, medical practitioner;
although that is inconsistent with the Commission's
current administrative practice.

Ð declare the Commission in breach of Council Directive


By recruiting the applicant in Grade A 5, the appointing 84/450/EEC to the extent that the Citizens First
authority had implicitly recognised his diploma in Factsheet on the Recognition of Diplomas and
C 327/28 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 24.10.98

Qualifications of General and Specialist Doctors in the nature and effects of the rules applicable to specialist
United Kingdom misrepresents the rules applicable to medical practitioners in the United Kingdom from the
specialist medical practitioners in the United Kingdom persons subject to their jurisdiction in order to deprive
in order not to promote the supply of specialist them of their substance and thereby to sanction the illegal
medical services by a category of medical practitioners transfer of the status of Community Medical Specialist'
who are qualified by law to practise the regulated from one category of medical practitioners Ð those who
medical profession as licensed specialist medical are qualified by law to practise the regulated medical
practitioners and who have completed the prescribed profession as licensed specialist medical practitioners
specialist medical training at Community level and recognised at Community level Ð to another category of
national level and thereby offer the minimum medical practitioners Ð those who are not qualified by
safeguards required by community law for practising a law to practise the regulated medical profession as
medical specialty regulated by Community law as a licensed specialist medical practitioners recognised at
specialist medical practitioner; Community level.

(1) OJ L 250, 19.9.1984, p. 17.


Ð order the defendant to pay compensation to be (2) Case T-235/95, OJ C 64, 2.3.1996, p. 19.
determined by the Court ex aequo et bono or by an Case T-262/97, OJ C 370, 6.12.1997, p. 8.
expert together with default interest at a rate to be Case T-286/97, OJ C 7, 10.1.1998, p. 25.
(3) Case C-148/96 P(R), (1996) ECR I-3883.
fixed by the Court for the non-material damage
Case C-78/97 P(R), (not published).
suffered by the applicant, a specialist medical Case C-199/98 P(R), pending.
practitioner in rheumatology recognised at Community
level, and listed on the Specialist List, in so far as the
defendant misrepresent the legal status of the category
of medical practitioners legally entitled to practise as
specialist medical practitioners recognised at
Community level in the Citizens First Factsheet on the
Recognition of Diplomas and Qualifications of
General and Specialist Doctors in the United Kingdom Action brought on 14 July 1998 by SocietaÁ Camar s.r.l.
thereby tarnishing their professional reputation; and and SocietaÁ Tico s.r.l. against Commission of the
European Communities
(Case T-117/98)
Ð order the defendant to pay the costs.
(98/C 327/51)

Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support: (Language of the case: Italian)

The applicant is a medical practitioner of British An action against the Commission of the European
nationality residing in the United Kingdom, who has Communities was brought before the Court of First
already brought several cases to the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 14 July 1998
Instance of the European Communities (2) and the Court by SocietaÁ Camar s.r.l. and SocietaÁ Tico s.r.l., represented
of Justice of the European Communities (3). He now by Wilma Viscardini DonaÁ, assisted by Mariano Paolin
claims having suffered damage caused by the and Simonetta DonaÁ, of the Padua Bar, with an address
Commission's failure to exercise the supervisory powers of for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Ernst
surveillance and control conferred on it by the EC Treaty Arendt, Rue Mathias Hardt.
in accordance with the prescribed legal framework to
adopt the measures necessary under Article 162 of the EC
Treaty to ensure that both it and its departments operate The applicants claim that the Court should:
in accordance with the provisions of this Treaty to
guarantee the information contained in the Citizens First
Factsheet on the Recognition of Diplomas and Ð annul, pursuant to Articles 173 and 174 of the EC
Qualifications of General and Specialist Doctors in the Treaty, the Commission decision Ð communicated by
United Kingdom is in conformity with Council Directive a letter from Franz Fischler, a Member of the
84/450/EEC of 10 September 1984 and thereby protect Commission, dated 23/24 April 1998 and received
the legitimate interests of the applicant. on 14 May 1998 Ð rejecting an application for
adaptation of the tariff quota for imports of bananas,
pursuant to Article 16(3) of Commission Regulation
The applicant submits that his damage derives from the (EEC) No 1442/93 (1);
illegal publication in breach of this Directive by the
Commission, of false information contained in the
Citizens First Factsheet on the Recognition of Diplomas Ð order the Commission, pursuant to Article 178 and
and Qualifications of General and Specialist Doctors in the second paragraph of Article 215 of the EC Treaty,
the United Kingdom which conceals the Community to pay compensation for damage;