Case C-250/01 P: Appeal brought on 2 July 2001 by Mario Costacurta against the order delivered on 7 June 2001 by the Second Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities in Case T-202/00 between Mr Costacurta and the Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2001-09-01
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European official, General Court (EU), action for annulment (EU), third country, workplace

1.9.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 245/9

Question 1:

The appellant claims that the Court should:

Is Article 1(3) of Council Directive 89/665/EEC of 21 Decem-
ber 1989 (1) on the coordination of the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions relating to the application of review
procedures to the award of public supply and public works
contracts to be interpreted as meaning that any person seeking
the award of a specific pending public contract is entitled to
institute a review procedure?

Question 2:

In the event that the answer given to Question 1 is no:

Is the abovementioned provision to be understood as meaning
that, if a tenderer’s bid is not eliminated by the contracting
authority, but the review body finds in the course of the review
procedure that the contracting authority would have been
bound to eliminate it, the tenderer has been or risks being
harmed by the infringement alleged by him — in this case the
finding by the contracting authority that a rival tenderer
submitted the best bid — and that he must therefore have the
right to bring a review procedure?

(1) OJ L 395, p. 33.

Appeal brought on 2 July 2001 by Mario Costacurta
against the order delivered on 7 June 2001 by the Second
Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities in Case T-202/00 between Mr Costacurta
and the Commission of the European Communities

(Case C-250/01 P)

(2001/C 245/17)

An appeal against the order delivered on 7 June 2001 by the
Second Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities in Case T-202/00 between Mr Costacurta and
the Commission of the European Communities was brought
before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on
2 July 2001 by Mario Costacurta, represented by Mr Petit,
of
the Luxembourg Bar, with an address for service in
Luxembourg.

— find the present appeal admissible;

— find the appeal well founded as to the substance;

— order, if the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice
allow it, the present appeal to be joined to the appeal
against the order of the Court of First Instance (Second
Chamber) of 7 June 2001 in Case T-328/00 concerning
the same dispute and lodged this day;

— set aside the order delivered by the Court of First Instance
(Second Chamber) of 7 June 2001 in Case T-202/00
Costacurta v Commission;

— make a decision as to how Case T-202/00 Costacurta v
Commission is to proceed in accordance with Article 54
of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice;

— order the Commission of the European Communities
already to pay the costs of the interlocutory proceedings
and of the present appeal;

— reserve the costs as to the substance; find, none the less,
that Article 88, rather than Article 87(2), of the Rules of
Procedure of the Court of First Instance are applicable;

— reserve to the appellant all other rights, dues, pleas and

actions.

Pleas and main arguments

— Lack of jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance and

breach of Community law.

— Prejudice to the appellant’s interests, misuse of powers.

— Error in law inasmuch as the Court of First Instance ruled
that retirement meant that the appellant no longer had
any right to seek annulment of the contested act: the
appellant claims the right to have his administrative
status regularised a posteriori.