ORDER OF THE FIRST CHAMBER OF THE COURT 
17 SEPTEMBER 1981 1 
Dominique Noëlle Oberthür 
ν Commission of the European Communities 
Case 24/79 — Costs 
In Case 24/79 — Costs 
DOMINIQUE NOËLLE OBERTHÜR 
ν 
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Facts and Issues 
In a judgment of 5 June 1980, the Court 
ordered the Commission of the 
European Communities to pay to Miss 
Dominique Noëlle Oberthür the sum of 
BFR 20 000 by way of damages and to 
pay the costs of the case. 
By an application received at the Court 
Registry on 20 July 1981, Counsel for 
Miss Oberthür requested the Court to 
make an order under Articles 73 and 74 
of the Rules of Procedure in relation to 
a sum of BFR 2 000 representing the 
travel and subsistence expenses incurred 
by his client in connection with her 
journey to Luxembourg on the day of 
the hearing. In his opinion, it is the responsibility of an applicant's Counsel 
to assess whether his client's presence at 
the hearing is necessary for the conduct 
of the case. 
In a document received at the Court 
Registry on 26 August 1981, the 
Commission submitted that the 
application should be dismissed, on the 
ground that the presence of Miss 
Oberthür at the hearing on 28 February 
1980 was not necessary for the purpose 
of the proceedings within the meaning of 
Article 73 (b) of the Rules of Procedure. 
The Advocate General delivered his 
opinion in the Deliberation Room on 16 
September 1981. 
1 — Language of the Case: French. 
2229 
ORDER OF 17. 9. 1981 — CASE 24/79 
Decision 
1 Article 73 of the Rules of Procedure provides that, in addition to sums 
payable to witnesses and experts and the costs referred to in Article 72, 
"expenses necessarily incurred by the parties for the purpose of the 
proceedings, in particular the travel and subsistence expenses and the re­
muneration of agents, advisers or lawyers", shall be regarded as recoverable 
costs. 
2 It follows from that provision that in general the travel and subsistence 
expenses which are recoverable are essentially those incurred by agents, 
advisers or lawyers. However, the travel and subsistence expenses of the 
applicant himself are also recoverable if his presence at the hearing is 
necessary for the purpose of the proceedings. 
3 This may be the case if the presence of the applicant in person is required 
because the Court has requested it, or because the hearing is concerned with 
the taking of evidence relating to events experienced by the applicant, or 
because the course of such events is extremely complicated and is the main 
point at issue before the Court. 
4 None of these possibilities applied in this case. The facts necessary for 
deciding the issue were largely contained in the personal file of the official 
concerned and in the documents relating to the procedure for promotion to 
Grade Β 2 for the year 1978. 
5 In these circumstances, the application must be dismissed. 
2230 
OBERTHÜR ν COMMISSION 
On those grounds, 
THE COURT (First Chamber) 
hereby orders as follows : 
The application concerning the taking into account as recoverable costs 
of the travel and subsistence expenses in connection with the applicant's 
journey to Luxembourg so as to be present at the hearing in person is 
dismissed. 
Luxembourg, 17 September 1981. 
J. A. Pompe 
Deputy Registrar T. Koopmans 
President of the First Chamber 
2231