Notice for the OJ

 

SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1

Action brought on 8 December 2003 by Flavia Angeletti against Commission of the European Communities

    (Case T-394/03)

    (Language of the case: French)

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 8 December 2003 by Flavia Angeletti, residing in Nice (France), represented by Juan Ramón Iturriagagoitia and Karine Delvolvé, lawyers.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

)    annul the medical findings of 22 February 2003, notified on 7 October 2003 and received on 14 October 2003 by Flavia Angeletti;

)    annul the decision of the Commission of 7 October 2003, received on 14 October 2003, refusing to recognise the occupational origin of the applicant's medical complaint;

)    annul the decision of the Commission of 17 October 2003, corrected by letter of 27 October 2003, charging to the applicant part of the fees and expenses charged by members of the medical committee;

)    annul the mandate of the medical committee, communicated to the applicant on 18 April 2003, as a preparatory act;

)    annul the letter of 5 May 2003 containing a refusal to allow the forwarding to the medical committee of a scan carried out on 21 February 2003, as a preparatory act;

)    annul the decision of 30 January 2001, and uphold the request of the applicant made by way of her complaint of 4 September 2000, and the opinion of the medical committee of 5 November 1999;

)    order the Commission to pay the fees and expenses of the medical committee in full;

)    order the Commission to pay, in their entirety, the fees and expenses incurred by the applicant in the context of the irregular opinion of the medical committee and of the decision of the institution taken on the basis thereof, together with interest thereon;

)    order the Commission to pay all the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant, a former official of the Commission, worked for several years in the Berlaymont building which was at the time contaminated with asbestos. In 1996, the applicant sought recognition of her illness as an occupational disease and, in 1998, she requested that a medical committee be consulted in accordance with Article 21 of the Rules on Sickness Insurance for Officials of the European Communities. That medial committee initially adopted a majority opinion in 2000 but, following a complaint from the applicant, the defendant decided to refer the matter back to it. By letter of 7 October 2003, the Commission informed the applicant that the medical committee had lodged its opinion. By the same letter, the Commission informed the applicant that it confirmed its decision not to recognise the applicant's medical complaint as being occupational in origin. By letters of 17 and 27 October 2003, the Commission charged to the applicant part of the fees and expenses of the members of the medical committee.

In support of her claims, the applicant alleges irregularity of the opinion of the medical committee and of the decisions and acts relating thereto, breach of the duty to have regard for the welfare of officials as regards the decision concerning the fees and expenses, breach of the principle of sound administration, misuse of powers and breach of legitimate expectations.

____________