ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE (Fifth Chamber)

23 July 1997

Case T-85/96

Francis Alan Clarke

v

European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (Cedefop)

‛No need to adjudicate’

Full text in German II-755

Application for:

annulment of (1) the decision of 5 April 1996, as amended by that of 22 April 1996, and (2) the decision of 21 May 1996, whereby the defendant rejected an application for the extension of the applicant's secondment to the Statistical Office of the European Communities in Luxembourg and ordered his posting to Thessaloniki.

Decision:

No need to adjudicate.

Abstract of the Order

The application for discontinuance of the action

By a decision of the defendant (Cedefop) of 31 July 1995, the applicant was seconded as from 1 September 1995, the date of the defendant's removal to Thessaloniki, to the Statistical Office of the European Communities (Eurostat) in Luxembourg.

By a decision of 5 April 1996, the defendant decided to extend the applicant's secondment to Eurostat until 2 May 1996.

By a decision of 22 April 1996, the defendant granted the applicant an extension of his secondment to Eurostat until 31 May 1996.

By a letter of 8 May 1996, the applicant applied to the defendant for an extension of his secondment until 30 September 1996, given that his transfer to Eurostat was scheduled for 1 October 1996.

By a decision of 21 May 1996, the defendant rejected that application.

By application lodged at the registry of the Court of First Instance on 31 May 1996, the applicant brought an action for the annulment of (1) the decision of 5 April 1996, as amended by the decision of 22 April 1996 and (2) the decision of 21 May 1996, whereby the defendant rejected the application for extension of his secondment to Eurostat in Luxembourg and ordered his posting to Thessaloniki.

By a separate document lodged at the registry of the Court of First Instance the same day, the applicant lodged an application for interim measures, seeking, first, suspension of the operation of the defendant's decision posting him to Thessaloniki and, secondly, the provisional maintenance of his posting with Eurostat in Luxembourg.

By order of 5 July 1996 (T-85/96 R Clarke v Cedefop [1996] ECRSC II-1003), the President of the Court of First Instance dismissed the application for interim measures.

On 18 November 1996, the applicant lodged an application with the registry of the Court of First Instance that the proceedings be discontinued. In its observations of 6 December 1996, the defendant stated that it had no objection to that request.

In those circumstances, the Court holds that there is no need to adjudicate.

Costs

The defendant requests the Court to order the applicant to pay all of the costs, pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 87(3) of the Rules of Procedure. It maintains that the applicant brought his action and his application for interim measures knowing that they had no chance of succeeding (paragraph 16).

Under Article 20 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities, ‘an official shall reside either in the place where he is employed or at no greater distance therefrom as is compatible with the proper performance of his duties’. When accepting his establishment on 1 January 1996, as an official of Cedefop, the applicant knew that he would be required to reside in Thessaloniki, the sole seat of the defendant since 1 September 1995 (paragraph 17).

Operative part:

There is no need to adjudicate on the action.

The applicant is ordered to pay his own costs and the costs incurred by the defendant in the proceedings for interim relief and in these proceedings.