CELEX: 62006FO0080
Language: en
Date: 2008-01-25 00:00:00
Title: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 25 January 2008. # Tineke Duyster v Commission of the European Communities. # Public service - Officials - Manifest inadmissibility. # Case F-80/06.

ORDER OF THE CIVIL SERVICE TRIBUNAL (First Chamber)
      25 January 2008
      Case F-80/06
      Tineke Duyster
      v
      Commission of the European Communities
      (Civil service – Officials – Parental leave – Application to withdraw parental leave – Lis pendens – Manifest inadmissibility)
      Application: brought under Articles 236 EC and 152 EA, in which Mrs Duyster seeks, in particular, annulment of the Commission’s decision
         of 11 May 2006 rejecting her complaint against the Commission’s decision of 22 December 2005 declaring inadmissible her request
         of 6 December 2005 seeking to end her parental leave with retroactive effect from 8 November 2004.
      
      Held: The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible. Each party is ordered to bear its own costs.
      
      Summary
      1.      Procedure – Admissibility of pleadings – Assessment as at the time when the pleading is submitted 
      (Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 114)
      2.      Procedure – Objection of lis pendens
      1.      Just as the admissibility of an action must be assessed at the time when it is brought, the admissibility of other pleadings,
         such as a plea of inadmissibility, must be assessed at the time when they are submitted. Such an interpretation ensures respect
         for the principles of legal certainty and the protection of legitimate expectations .
      
      (see para. 42)
      See:
      50/84 Bensider and Others v Commission [1984] ECR 3991, para. 8
      
      T-236/00 R II Stauner and Others v Parliament and Commission [2001] ECR II‑2943, para. 49; T-219/01 Commerzbank v Commission [2003] ECR II‑2843, para. 61
      
      2.      An action which is between the same parties and has the same purpose on the basis of the same submissions as an action brought
         previously must be dismissed as inadmissible.
      
      (see para. 52)
      See:
      172/83 and 226/83 Hoogovens Groep v Commission [1985] ECR 2831, para. 9; 358/85 and 51/86 France v Parliament [1988] ECR 4821, para. 12
      
      judgment of 14 June 2007 in T-68/07 Landtag Schleswig-Holstein v Commission, not published in the ECR, para. 16