CELEX: 61976CO0091
Language: en
Date: 1976-10-15 00:00:00
Title: Order of the President of the First Chamber of the Court of 15 October 1976. # Joëlle de Lacroix v Court of Justice of the European Communities. # Case 91-76 R.

Avis juridique important

|

61976O0091

Order of the President of the First Chamber of 15 October 1976.  -  Joëlle de Lacroix v Court of Justice of the European Communities.  -  Case 91-76 R.  

European Court reports 1976 Page 01561

PartiesGroundsDecision on costsOperative part
Parties

IN CASE 91/76 R , JOELLE DE LACROIX , REPRESENTED BY NICOLA CATALANO , ADVOCATE , OF ROME , WITH AN ADDRESS FOR SERVICE IN LUXEMBOURG AT THE CHAMBERS OF ERNEST ARENDT , CENTRE LOUVIGNY ,   APPLICANT ,   V COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES , REPRESENTED BY A . VAN HOUTTE , ACTING AS AGENT ,   DEFENDANT ,    

Grounds

1 UNDER ARTICLE 83 ( 2 ) OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE ANY SUSPENSION OF OPERATION IS SUBJECT TO THE EXISTENCE OF CIRCUMSTANCES GIVING RISE TO URGENCY AND OF GROUNDS ESTABLISHING A PRIMA FACIE CASE FOR SUCH A MEASURE .    2 AS TO THE NATURE OF THE MEASURE APPLIED FOR , PROVISIONAL ADMISSION TO THE TESTS IN QUESTION WOULD AMOUNT NOT TO A SUSPENSION OF THE OPERATION OF THE CONTESTED MEASURE BUT TO A COMPLETE REVERSAL , EVEN THOUGH ONLY PROVISIONAL , OF SUCH A NATURE AS TO DENUDE THE MAIN ACTION OF ITS PURPOSE .    3 THEREFORE THE COURT HAS JURISDICTION ONLY TO SUSPEND , IF NECESSARY , THE ENGAGEMENT PROCEDURE IN PROGRESS .    4 SUCH A SUSPENSION WOULD INVOLVE SERIOUS DIFFICULTIES FOR THE DEFENDANT , SINCE THE PROCEDURE , AS SET FORTH IN THE DEFENDANT ' S UNDISPUTED STATEMENT , IS AIMED AT TEMPORARILY FILLING AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THREE VACANT POSTS IN A SECTION WHICH COMPRISES EIGHT POSTS IN ALL .    5 FURTHERMORE ANY SUCH SUSPENSION WOULD ALSO INVOLVE SERIOUS INCONVENIENCE FOR THE OTHER CANDIDATES .    6 IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES , IT IS NECESSARY , UNDER ARTICLE 83 ( 2 ) OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE , TO EXAMINE ' THE FACTUAL AND LEGAL GROUNDS ESTABLISHING A PRIMA FACIE CASE FOR THE . . . MEASURES '  APPLIED FOR .    7 TO THE EXTENT TO WHICH THEY WERE SET OUT AT THE HEARING , THE GROUNDS ALLEGED RAISE TWO QUESTIONS , FIRST WHETHER ARTICLE 5 OF ANNEX III TO THE STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS APPLIES , IF ONLY BY ANALOGY , TO THE PROCEDURE IN DISPUTE , AND SECONDLY WHETHER THAT PROVISION REQUIRES THAT THE DECISIONS REFERRED TO IN THE FOURTH PARAGRAPH - WHICH THE CONTESTED DECISION MIGHT BE REGARDED AS RESEMBLING - SHOULD BE ACCOMPANIED BY A STATEMENT OF THE REASONS ON WHICH THEY ARE BASED .    8 IN VIEW FIRST OF THE DISADVANTAGES OF A SUSPENSION AND SECONDLY OF THE QUESTIONABLE NATURE OF THE GROUNDS ALLEGED , THERE IS NO CASE FOR SUSPENDING THE PROCEDURE .    9 THEREFORE THE APPLICATION MUST BE DISMISSED .    

Decision on costs

COSTS  10 IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES COSTS SHOULD BE RESERVED .    

Operative part

ON THOSE GROUNDS , THE PRESIDENT OF THE FIRST CHAMBER OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES  BY WAY OF INTERLOCUTORY DECISION , HEREBY ORDERS :   1 . THE APPLICATION IS DISMISSED ;   2 . COSTS ARE RESERVED .