You are on page 1of 2

C 112/22 EN Official Journal of the European Union 10.5.

2003

Appeal brought on 2 April 2003 by Chantal Hectors — The Court of First Instance infringed the general obli-
against the judgment delivered on 23 January 2003 by the gation to state the grounds on which decisions are based.
Fifth Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities in Case T-181/01 between Chan- The judgment of the Court of First Instance wrongly
tal Hectors and European Parliament considers that the decision of the authority empowered
to conclude contracts of employment not to appoint the
applicant provides an adequate statement of reasons by
(Case C-150/03 P) stating that the relevant internal rules according to which
the chairman of the political group concerned had to
choose one of the first three candidates on the list of
(2003/C 112/38) suitable candidates drawn up by the selection board.

— The Court of First Instance infringed Article 12 of the


Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the
An appeal against the judgment delivered on 23 January 2003 European Communities.
by the Fifth Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the The judgment of the Court of First Instance is wrong in
European Communities in Case T-181/01 between Chantal not finding that there was a manifest error of assessment
Hectors and European Parliament was brought before the in that it was not established that an assessment of the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 2 April 2003 candidates’ qualifications had taken place.
by Chantal Hectors, represented by Georges Vandersanden and
Laure Levi, with an address for service in Luxembourg. — The Court of First Instance disregarded the principle of
equal treatment.

The appellant claims that the Court should: The judgment of the Court of First Instance wrongly
considers that the applicant has not established a pre-
sumption of direct or indirect discrimination on the basis
— set aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of
that the applicant was 6 months pregnant at the time of
the European Communities of 23 January 2003 in Case
the recruitment procedure.
T-181/01 and

— accordingly, uphold the applicant’s claims at first instance


and, thus,

— annul the decision taken, on a date unknown, by


the authority empowered to conclude contracts of Appeal brought on 2 April 2003 by Karl L. Meyer against
employment appointing Mr A. B. to the post of the judgment of 13 February 2003 of the Third Chamber
administrator in the PPE-DE Group of the European of the Court of First Instance of the European Communi-
Parliament and the decision, of unknown date, ties in Case T-333/01 K. Meyer v Commission
rejecting the applicant’s candidature for that post
and, in so far as necessary, annul the decision
(Case C-151/03 P)
rejecting the applicant’s complaint, taken on 28 May
2001;
(2003/C 112/39)
— order the defendant to pay damages assessed at
EUR 60 554,7, subject to increment;
An appeal against the judgment of 13 February 2003 of the
— order the defendant to pay the entire costs incurred Third Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European
at first instance and on appeal. Communities in Case T-333/01 K. Meyer v Commission.
was brought before the Court of Justice of the European
Communities on 2 April 2003 (lodged by fax on 23 March
2003) by Karl L. Meyer, represented by Jean-Dominique des
Arcis.
Pleas in law and main arguments

— The Court of First Instance disregarded the principle The applicant claims that the Court should:
‘patere quam ipse legem fecisti’ and the principle of
legality. — set aside paragraphs 38, 39 and 40 of the judgment of
the Court of First Instance;
The judgment of the Court of First Instance wrongly
considers that the authority empowered to conclude — amend and correct accordingly paragraphs 41 to 47 of
contracts of employment has unfettered discretion to the judgment;
organise interviews with the candidates when neither the
internal rules on the recruitment of members of the — order the Commission to pay the costs incurred at first
temporary staff nor the vacancy notice provide for them. instance and on appeal.
10.5.2003 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 112/23

Pleas in law and main arguments Removal from the register of Case C-26/02 (1)

— Irregularity of the proceedings (2003/C 112/40)

The Court of First Instances misinterpreted the case as


presented by the applicant, making no mention in its By order of 26 February 2003 the President of the Court of
judgment of the evidence led by it and reflected in the Justice of the European Communities ordered the removal
Report for the Hearing. Furthermore, the judgment is also from the register of Case C-26/02: Kingdom of Spain v Council
misleading as to the course of the hearing before the of the European Communities.
Court of First Instance.
(1 ) OJ C 68 of 16.3.2002.
— Breach of Community law

The Court of First Instance wrongly considered that


Article 125 of Council Decision 86/283/EEC of 30 June
1986 on the association of the overseas countries and
Removal from the register of Case C-254/02 ( 1)
territories with the European Economic Community does
not include agricultural projects among those capable of
(2003/C 112/41)
being financed by Community funding. The Court of First
Instance ignored the evidence put forward in that respect
by the applicant.
By order of 25 February 2003 the President of the Court of
Moreover, the Court of First Instance infringed the Justice of the European Communities ordered the removal
Charter of Fundamental Rights and the rights of the from the register of Case C-254/02 (Reference for a preliminary
defence by misinterpreting the complaints put forward ruling by the VAT and Duties Tribunals, London Tribunal
by the applicant. Centre): Fast Forward Resources plc v Commissioners of
Customs and Excise.

(1 ) OJ C 202 of 24.8.2002.