Order of the Court of 14 November 1963. – Claude Lassalle v European Parliament.

Parties

++++

IN CASE 15/63

CLAUDE LASSALLE, AN OFFICIAL OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

APPLICANT,

V

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

DEFENDANT,

Subject of the case

APPLICATION TO INTERVENE MADE BY THE STAFF COMMITTEE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, REPRESENTED BY THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ELECTED ON 27 AND 28 FEBRUARY 1963 AND 5 MARCH 1963, ASSISTED BY ERNEST ARENDT OF THE LUXEMBOURG BAR, WITH AN ADDRESS FOR SERVICE IN LUXEMBOURG AT THE CHAMBERS OF MR ARENDT, 6 RUE W . GOERGEN;

Grounds

WHEREAS IN SUPPORT OF ITS APPLICATION THE INTERVENER MAINTAINS THAT, BY USING THE GENERAL WORD ' PERSON ', ARTICLES 37 ( EEC ) AND 38 ( EAEC ) OF THE PROTOCOLS ON THE STATUTE OF THE COURT EXTEND THE RIGHT TO INTERVENE TO ALL PARTIES REPRESENTING AN ORGANIZED FOCUS OF LEGITIMATE INTERESTS;

WHEREAS THERE IS NO REASON TO BELIEVE THAT THE AUTHORS OF THE EEC AND THE EAEC TREATIES WISHED TO EXTEND THE OPPORTUNITIES TO INTERVENE TO THE POINT OF ALLOWING INTERVENTION BY ENTITIES LACKING LEGAL PERSONALITY OR EVEN ITS BASIC ASPECTS;

WHEREAS, IN PARTICULAR, THESE ASPECTS INCLUDE INDEPENDENCE AND RESPONSIBILITY EVEN IF LIMITED;

WHEREAS, IN THIS RESPECT, THE PROVISION ESTABLISHING THE STAFF COMMITTEE, NAMELY ARTICLE 9 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS, SHOULD BE CONSIDERED;

WHEREAS, WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE NORMAL FUNCTIONS LAID DOWN BY THE FIRST THREE SUBPARAGRAPHS OF PARAGRAPH ( 3 ) OF THAT ARTICLE WHICH ARE RELEVANT TO THIS CASE, MANIFESTATIONS OF THE WILL OF THE COMMITTEE ARE INTENDED TO BE OPERATIVE ONLY WITHIN THE INSTITUTION;

WHEREAS IN FACT THESE FUNCTIONS ARE SECONDARY TO THE ACTIVITY OF THE INSTITUTION;

WHEREAS, THEREFORE, IN THE EXERCISE OF ITS FUNTIONS LAID DOWN IN THE FIRST THREE SUBPARAGRAPHS OF ARTICLE 9(3 ) OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS THE NATURE OF THE STAFF COMMITTEE IS THAT OF AN INTERNAL AGENCY OF ITS INSTITUTION;

WHEREAS, THEREFORE, IT HAS NO CAPACITY TO BRING LEGAL PROCEEDINGS;

WHEREAS, THEREFORE, ITS APPLICATION TO INTERVENE MUST BE DISMISSED AS INADMISSIBLE;

Endorsements

ON THOSE GROUNDS,

UPON READING THE PLEADINGS;

UPON HEARING THE REPORT OF THE JUDGE-RAPPORTEUR;

UPON HEARING THE PARTIES;

UPON HEARING THE OPINION OF THE ADVOCATE - GENERAL;

HAVING REGARD TO ARTICLE 173 OF THE EEC TREATY AND ARTICLE 142 OF THE TREATY OF THE EAEC;

HAVING REGARD TO ARTICLES 37 ( EEC ) AND 38 ( EAEC ) OF THE PROTOCOLS ON THE STATUTE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE;

HAVING REGARD TO THE STAFF REGULATIONS;

HAVING REGARD TO ARTICLES 69, 70 AND 93 OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES;

Operative part

1 . THE APPLICATION TO INTERVENE IS DISMISSED AS INADMISSIBLE;

2 . THE COSTS OF THE INTERVENTION PROCEDURE SHALL BE BORNE AS FOLLOWS :

( A ) IN APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 70 OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE THE DEFENDANT IN THE ORIGINAL CASE SHALL BEAR ITS OWN COSTS;

( B ) HAVING BEEN UNSUCCESSFUL IN THEIR CONCLUSIONS THE APPLICANT IN THE ORIGINAL CASE AND THE INTERVENER SHALL EACH BEAR THEIR OWN COSTS .