Notice for the OJ

 

Action brought on 19 December 2003 by Angel Angelidis against the European Parliament

(Case T-416/03)

(Language of the case: French)

An action against the European Parliament was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 19 December 2003 by Angel Angelidis, resident in Luxembourg, represented by Eric Boigelot, lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

-    annul the decision of the Secretary General of the European Parliament taken on 4 March 2003 definitively adopting the applicant's staff report for 2001;

-    annul that staff report for 2001;

-    annul the implied decision to reject the applicant's complaint submitted on 27 May 2003 in accordance with Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations and seeking the annulment of the contested decision;

-    order the defendant to pay to the applicant the sum of EUR 20 000 assessed on an equitable basis, subject to increase or decrease in the course of the proceedings, in respect of damages for non-material harm and harm to his career, on the basis both of substantial irregularities and of significant delay in the writing of the 2001 report in a particularly distressing period for the applicant;

-    order the defendant to pay the costs in accordance with Article 87(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant claims, firstly, a breach of Articles 26 and 43 of the Staff Regulations, of the general provisions for giving effect to Article 43 as adopted by the Bureau of the European Parliament on 8 March 1999 and of the instructions relating to the procedure for the writing of staff reports.

He also pleads misuse of powers and infringement of general principles of law, such as respect for the rights of the defence, the principle of good administration, the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations and the duty to have regard for the welfare of officials, the principle of equal treatment and those general principles requiring the AIPN to take a decision only on the basis of legally permissible grounds, namely those which are pertinent and not tainted by a manifest error of assessment, fact or law.

____________