Notice for the OJ

 

Order of the Court of First Instance of 11 December 2001 in Case T-20/01 Maria Concetta Cerafogli and Others v European Central Bank ¹

(Amendment of the Staff Rules of the European Central Bank ( Action for annulment ( Inadmissibility)

    (Language of the case: German)

In Case T-20/01, Maria Concetta Cerafogli, residing in Frankfurt (Federal Republic of Germany), Monika Esch-Leonhardt, residing in Frankfurt, Marco Luigi Fassetta, residing in Wiesbaden (Federal Republic of Germany), Tillmann Frommhold, residing in Karben (Federal Republic of Germany), Johannes Priesemann, residing in Frankfurt and Marc van de Velde, residing in Usingen (Federal Republic of Germany), represented by N. Pflüger, R. Steiner and S. Mittländer, lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg, supported by the Organisation of Employees in European and International Institutions in the Federal Republic of Germany (IPSO), represented by B. Karthaus, M. Roth and C. Roth, lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg, against European Central Bank (Agents: C. Ziliolo, M. López Torres and B. Wägenbaur) ( application for the annulment and/or a declaration of inapplicability of Articles 7.2.0 and 8.1.0 of the Staff Rules, Administrative Circular 01/2000 concerning Travel Expenses, the gateway clause inserted into the applicants' employment contracts and the decision of the President of the ECB of 27 November 2000 rejecting the applicants' complaint, and for a declaration that the ECB was required to consult the personnel committee before adopting Administrative Circular No 01/2000 and that the defendant is not empowered unilaterally to introduce amendments to the terms and conditions of employment or Staff Rules into the contracts between the applicants and itself, nor to enforce such amendments, ( the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber), composed of M. Jaeger, President, K. Lenaerts and J. Azizi, Judges; Registrar: H. Jung, made an order on 11 December 2001, the operative part of which is as follows:

1.    The application is dismissed as inadmissible.

2.    The parties shall bear their own costs.

____________

¹ - OJ 2001 C 108