Súdny dvor Európskej únie·Rozsudok·12.12.1967

C-15/67

ECLI:EU:C:1967:53

Súd: Súdny dvor Európskej únie
IČS: 61967CJ0015
Zdroj: eur-lex.europa.eu ↗

JUDGMENTOFTHECOURT(FIRSTCHAMBER) 12DECEMBER19671

AloisBauer

vCommissionoftheEuropeanCommunities

Case15/67

Summary

1.Procedure—Interestintakinglegalproceedings—Typeof interestjustifying anapplicationtotheCourt

2.Costs—Applicationsby officialsof theEuropeanCommunities—Costswhich onepartyhasunreasonablycausedtheoppositepartytoincur (Rulesof Procedure,secondsubparagraphof Article69(5)andArticle70)

1.Theinterestjustifyingtheapplication 2.Of.summary,JoinedCases5,7and mustnotbeofanabstractnature. 8/60,Rec.1961,p.205.

InCase15/67

AloisBauer,anofficialoftheCommissionoftheEuropeanCommunities, residinginLuxembourgassistedbyFernandProbst,AdvocateoftheLuxem bourgBar,withanaddressforserviceinLuxembourgattheChambersofhis Counsel,26avenuedelaLiberté,

applicant,

CommissionoftheEuropeanCommunities,takingtheplaceoftheHigh AuthorityoftheEuropeanCoalandSteelCommunityinaccordancewith Article9oftheTreatyof8April1965,representedbyitsLegalAdviser PierreLamoureux,actingasAgent,withanaddressforserviceinLuxem bourgat2placedeMetz,

defendant,

ApplicationconcerningthedecisionofthePresidentoftheHighAuthority dated3March1967refusingtheapplicant'srequestmadeon13February 1967forthereportsmadeonhiminaccordancewiththefirstparagraphof Article43oftheStaffRegulationstobecommunicatedtohiminaccordance withthesecondparagraphofthatArticle,

1—LanguageoftheCase:French.

JUDGMENTOF12.12.1967—CASE15/67

THECOURT(FirstChamber)

composedof:A.M.Donner,PresidentofChamber,R.Monaco(Rapporteur) andJ.MertensdeWilmars,Judges,

Advocate-General:J.Gand Registrar:A.VanHoutte

givesthefollowing

JUDGMENT

Issuesoffactandoflaw

I — Summary of the facts InsubmittingthisrequestIreferto Article90oftheStaffRegulations.For Byletterof13February1967MrAlois thesakeofcompletenessImustmen BaueraddressedtothePresidentofthe tionthatIfulfiltherequirementsof HighAuthorityacomplaintunder Article45(1)asregardspromotion.';) Article90of'theStaffRegulationsin AtranslationoftheletterintoFrench thefollowingterms: wasalsoprovidedbytheapplicant. 'Am7.Dezember1966wurdevonder ThePresidentoftheHighAuthority VerwaltungderHohenBehordeunter repliedtothiscomplaintbyanoteof DokumentNr.7189/66eineListeder 3March1967inthefollowingterms: Kandidatenveroffentlicht,diefüreine 'Ihavereceivedyournotedated13 Promotionvorgesehensind. February1974referringtothelistof AnfangJanuar1967batichdenDirek candidatestobeconsideredforpro torderPersonalabteilungumEi'nsicht motion,whichwasbroughttothenotice indieBeurteilung,diezumeinemAus ofthestaffon7December1966. schlußausderVorschlagslistegeführt Thequestionwhichyouraiseinthis hat.DieseBittegründetsichaufArtikel connexionnecessitatesmyreminding 43Absatz2desPersonalstatuts. youthatunderArticle45oftheStaff Ichgestattemir,diesesAnliegenunter Regulationspromotionshallbeexclu BezugnahmeaufArtikel90desStatuts sivelybyselection;furthermorean anSieheranzutragen.DerVollstandig officialcannotassertanyrighttopro keithalbermöchteicherwahnen,daß motion.AstheCourtofJusticehas ichdieimArtikel45Absatz1geforder emphasizedonseveraloccasionsthe tenVoraussetzungenfureineBeforde appointingauthorityisundernoobliga rungerfülle.'; tiontogivereasonsfornotpromoting ('On7December1966'theAdministra anofficialor,consequently,foromitting tionoftheHighAuthoritypublished hisnamefromthelistofcandidatesto underNo7189/66alistofcandidates beconsideredforpromotion. consideredforpromotion. InconclusionIwouldpointoutthatin AtthebeginningofJanuary1967I anyeventastheCourtofJusticehas askedtheDirectorofPersonnelfor alsohadoccasiontomakeclear,astate authoritytoacquaintmyselfwiththe mentofreasonswithregardtothecri reportleadingtomyexclusionfrom teriaforanofficial'snotbeingpro thatlist.Thisrequestisbasedonthe motedwouldbeinappropriate;more secondparagraphofArticle43ofthe oversuchastatementmightdoharm StaffRegulations. toanofficialnotpromotedornot

BAUERvCOMMISSION

placedonthelistofcandidatestobe B—Initsstatementof defencethede consideredforpromotion.' fendantcontendsthattheCourtshould: On5May1967theapplicantlodged 'declarethatthepurposeofthepresent thepresentapplicationattheCourt applicationhasceasedtoexistandcon Registry. sequentlystrikeitfromthelist; asregardscostsaccepttheabove-men tioneddeclarationbytheHighAuthor II — Conclusions of the ityandordertheapplicanttobearall parties costsoftheproceedingssubsequentto thelodgmentoftheHighAuthority's statementofdefence; A—Inhisapplicationtheapplicant claimsthattheCourtshould: reservingallrights'. Initsrejoinder 'declarethisapplicationadmissibleand alsowell-founded;andaccordingly 'declarethatthepurposeofthepresent amendtherefusalofthePresidentof applicationhasceasedtoexist; ruleonthesharingofcostsasthelaw theHighAuthorityoftheEuropean requires; CoalandSteelCommunity,declare'that reservingallrights'. theapplicant'srequestmustbecom pliedwithandthatthereportsmade withregardtohimmustbecommuni III — Submissions and argu catedtohiminaccordancewiththe ments of the parties secondparagraphofArticle43ofthe StaffRegulationsofOfficialsandSer Admissibility vantsoftheCommunity,andinpar ticularthatdated11May1966from Theapplicantmaintainsthathisap theDirectorateforOtherSourcesof plicationhasbeenmadeintime;healso Energyheaded:"AppreciationdeM. claimsaninterestintakinglegalpro AloisBauer"("ReportonMrAlois ceedingsunderArticle43andthelast Bauer")beginningwiththewords"En sentenceofthefirstsubparagraphof servicealaHauteAuthorite"andend Article45(1)oftheStaffRegulations. Inhisviewitfollowsfromthesepro ing"recherchedel'essentiel"; visionsthattheability,efficiencyand orderthedefendanttopaythecosts'. conductintheserviceofeachofficial

Inhisreplytheapplicantclaimsthat mustbethesubjectofperiodicalre theCountshould: portsbytheappointingauthorityand thatthesereportsmustbecommunica 'declarethatthelodgmentattheCourt tedtotheofficialconcerned.Every RegistryoftheCorradinireporttogether officialisentitledtomakeanycom withtheotherbytheHighAuthority mentswhichheconsidersrelevanton topaythecostsconstitutesaclearac thesereports. ceptanceoftheoriginalrequestbothas Thesereportsareamongthefactors toformandcontentwithallconse whichtheappointingauthoritymust quencesinlaw; takeintoaccountinmakingitsselec declareinfavouroftheapplicantthat tionwhenlistsofcandidatestobecon therehasbeenthisacceptanceofhis sideredforpromotionaredrawnup. requestonthepartoftheHighAuthor Furthermoreamoredetailedanalysis ity; ofthepromotionsystemestablishedby declarefurtherastnelawmayrequire; theStaffRegulationsshowsthatthese reservingallotherrights,claimsand reportswereintendedbythelegisla actions'; turetoconstitutethemaincriterionon

JUDGMENTOF12.12.1967—CASE15/67

whichtheappointingauthorityisto Thedefendant'sreplyinitsstatement selectofficialsforpromotion.Theselec of defenceisthatafterlodgingtheap tionmustbemadeafterconsideration plicationtotheCourttheapplicantwas ofthecomparativemeritsoftheofficials sentforbytheDirectorofPersonnel eligibleforpromotionandofthereports whocommunicatedtohimthereportof onthem.Acomparisonofthemerits 11May1966mentionedinthecon oftheindividualofficialsnecessarilyin clusionscontainedinhisapplication, volvesacomparisonoftheirability, this'beingtheonlyexistingreportwith efficiencyandconductintheservice. regardtohim.Inhisnoteof25May Sinceitispreciselythesefactorswhich 1967theapplicantafterthankingthe arethesubjectoftheperiodicalreports DirectorateofPersonnelforthiscom referred'toinArticle43of'theStaff municationaskedthatthisreportbe Regulationsitfollows'thattheappoint senttohisCounselbytheAgentofthe ingauthority'sselectionmustinfactbe HighAuthorityinthepresentproceed based,ifnotexclusively,atanyrate ings,seeingthatacasewaspending mainlyonthesereportswhichinter before'theCourt.Thiswasdonebya aliaprovidetheonlyreliablestandard letterfromtheHighAuthoritydated ofevaluationinthismatter.Although 29May1967. theapplicantmeets'therequirements Onthesefactsthedefendantcontends laiddowninArticle45(1)oftheStaff thattherequestmadebytheapplicant Regulationshewasomittedfromthe inhisapplicationhavingbeenmet,the listofcandidatestobeconsideredfor applicationhaslostitspurpose.The promotionwhichwasbroughttothe defendantaddsthatbyletterof31May noticeofthestaffon7December1966. 1967,theapplicant'sCounselspecifically Inviewoftheprovisionsreferredto askedtheHighAuthoritytolayastate abovethisomissioncouldonlyhave mentbeforetheCourtandexpressed beendecidedononthebasisofthe theviewthatthedefendantshouldoffer reportsmaderegardinghimunder topaythecosts.Thereforethelodg Article43. mentofitsstatementofdefencemeets Theapplicantclaimsthatonthese theapplicant'sclaim.Asregardscosts groundshehasaclearinterestinhav althoughinhisnoteof13February ingthesereportscommunicatedtohim 1967theapplicantmadearequest andthathisapplicationistherefore ('...EinsichtindieBeurteilung,die admissible. zumeinemAusschlußausderVor schlagslistegeführthat...')('...to Substance acquaintmyselfwiththereportleading tomyexclusionfromthatlist[ofcan Theapplicantassertsthattheofficial's didatesconsideredforpromotion]...') righttohavetheabove-mentionedre whichdifferedconsiderablyfromthat portscommunicatedto'himisenshrined intheconclusionsintheapplication inArticle43(2)oftheStaffRegu (...'communiquerlesrapportsétablis lations.Thenoteof3March1967by asonsujet...')('...thatthereports thePresidentoftheHighAuthority, madewithregardtohimmustbecom whilstavoidingadirectanswer,never municatedtohim...'),theHigh thelesscontainsanimpliedrefusalto Authorityispreparedtopaythecosts accepttheapplicant'srequestwhichis incurredbyMrBauerintheactionup specificallybasedonArticle43(2)of tothetimewhenitlodgeditsstate theStaffRegulations.Thedecisioncon mentofdefence. tainedinthisnoteshouldaccordingly Inhisreplytheapplicantconsidersthat beannulledandreadoptedinamended hemustdefine'hisattitudeonthe'non form. disclosures'and'reservationswhichthe

BAUERvCOMMISSION

HighAuthorityintendsshouldaccom onceforthecostshehashadtoincur pany'itsacceptance.Onthispointhe intheactionhaveprovidedinallre observesthattheHighAuthority,whilst spectsthereliefsought(communication assertingthatthepurposeoftheappli totheapplicantofthereportsconcern cationhasceasedtoexistandwhilst inghimandthebearingofthecostsby undertakingtopaythecostsofthe thedefendant)andhaverenderedthe actionuptothetimeoflodgmentof applicationdevoidofallpurpose.The thestatementofdefence,isseekingto lodgmentofastatementinreplyobliged avoidthenaturalandlogicalconse theCommissiontolodgearejoinderto quencesofitsacquiescence,thatisto showthattheactionhadlostitspur say,recognitionoftheadmissibilityof pose;theapplicanthasdeliberatelyre theapplication,or,moreaccurately, fusedtoacceptthisandhassoughtto recognitionoftheapplicant'sinterest createanartificialconfusiononthe inseeingthatthereportsmadewith pointsoftheconclusionsmentioned regardtohim arecommunicatedtohim above.Forthesereasonstheapplicant inaccordancewiththesecondparagraph isactingimproperlyinprotractingpro ofArticle43oftheStaffRegulations. ceedingswhichnolongerserveany TothisendtheCommissionissetting usefulpurposeandarenolongerjusti upanartificialdistinctionbetweenthe fied.Itmaywellbeaskedwhether'the requestformulatedbytheapplicantin conductoftheapplicantincausingthe hisletterof13February1967andthe defendanttoincurthecostsinvolvedis conclusionsintheapplication.Infact notunreasonablewithinthemeaningof thisdistinctionisnon-existent.Inboth Article69(3)oftheRulesofProcedure casestherequestismateriallythesame, oftheCourt. saveonlythatintheletterof13 Thedefendantaccordinglyasksthe February1967itis'inamorecon Courttodeclarethattheapplication densedformthanintheapplication'. hasnowlostitspurposeandtoruleon TheapplicantthusaskstheCourtto costsasthelawmayrequire. declarethatthelodgmentofthereport of11May1966attheCountRegistry andtheHighAuthority'soffertopay IV — Procedure thecostsnecessarilyimplytotalaccept anceonallpointsoftherequestcon Theprocedurefolloweditsnormal tainedintheapplication. course.

Thedefendantobservesthattheappli UponhearingthereportoftheJudge- canthaslodgedastatementinreply Rapporteurandtheopinionofthe althoughtherewasnooccasionforany Advocate-General,theFirstChamber furtherpleadings.Itisonlynecessary oftheCourtdecidednottomakeany torefertotheconclusionsintheappli preparatoryinquiry. cationtoestablishthatthecommunica Thepublichearingtookplaceon9 tiontotheapplicantoftheoneand November1967. onlyreportonhimandtheoffermade TheAdvocate-Generaldeliveredhis bytheCommdssiontoreimbursehimat opinionon21November1967.

Groundsofjudgment

TheapplicantclaimsinhisapplicationsthattheCourtshould:

'amendtherefusalofthePresidentoftheHighAuthorityoftheCoaland SteelCommunityanddeclarethattheapplicant'srequestmustbecomplied

JUDGMENTOF12.12.1967—CASE15/67

withandthatthereportsmadewithregardtohimmustbecommunicatedto himinaccordancewiththesecondparagraphofArticle43oftheStaffRegu lationsofOfficialsandServantsoftheCommunityandinparticularthat dated11May1966fromtheDirectorateforOtherSourcesofEnergy headed:"AppréciationdeM.AloisBauer"("ReportonMrAloisBauer") beginningwiththewords"EnservicealaHauteAutorite"andending "recherchedel'essentiel";

orderthedefendanttopaythecosts'.

Itisnotdisputedthatthedefendantbyitsletterof29May1967communi catedtotheapplicantthereportof11 May1966whichistheonlyone makinganassessmentwithregardtohim.Thedefendantalsoproducedthis reportbywayofascheduletoitsstatementofdefence.Ithasfurtherunder takentopaythecostsoftheactionincurredbytheapplicantuptothetime whenitsstatementofdefencewaslodged.Thecommunicationofthisreport andtheoffertopaythecostssatisfythepurposeoftheapplication.Thereis thereforenooccasionfortheCourttogiveanydecisiononthispoint.

Theapplicanthastakentheviewthatthedefendantmadeitsacceptancesub jectto'reservationsornon-disclosures'soastoavoidrecognizingtheadmissi bilityoftheapplicationandinparticulartoavoidadmittingtheapplicant's interestinsecuringthecommunicationtohimofreportsmadewithregardto himinaccordancewiththesecondparagraphofArticle43oftheStaffRegu lations.Heaccordinglylodgedastatementinreplyinwhichheclaimsthat theCourtshoulddeclarethatthelodgmentofthisreportandtheoffertopay thecostsoftheproceedingsconstituteaclearacceptanceoftheoriginal request,withallitsconsequencesinlaw.

Initsstatementofdefencethedefendanthasallegedincidentallythatthe requestmadebytheapplicantinhisnoteof13February1967addressedto thePresidentoftheHighAuthoritywasintermsdifferentfromthoseinthe conclusionscontainedintheapplication.Suchanallegationevenifwell- foundedisirrelevanttothequestionatissueandinthepresentcasecannot thereforeadverselyaffecttheapplicant.Theinterestwhichtheapplicant claimsintheconclusionscontainedinhisreplyassumesanabstractcharacter afterthecommunicationtohimofthereportof11 May1966andistherefore insufficienttojustifytheadmissibilityofsuchsubmissionsandthecontinua tionoftheproceedings.Forthesereasonsthestepstakenbytheapplicant fromthetimeofthereplymustbeconsideredashavingbeenunnecessary.

BAUERvCOMMISSION

Costs

Thedefendanthasagreedinitsstatementofdefencetobearthecostsin curredbytheapplicantuptothetimewhenitlodgedthisstatement;itis properfortheCourttotakejudicialnoticeofthis.

UnderArticle70oftheRulesofProcedureoftheCourtofJustice,costs incurredbytheinstitutionsinproceedingscommencedbyservantsofthe Communitiesshallbebornebythoseinstitutions,withoutprejudicetothe secondsubparagraphofArticle69(3)ofthoseRules,underwhichtheCourt mayorderevenasuccessfulpartytopaycostswhichtheCourtconsidersthat partytohaveunreasonablycausedtheoppositepartytoincur.

Theapplicantmustberegardedashavingunreasonablycausedthedefendant toincurthecostsfromthetimeofthereply,inviewoftheunnecessary natureofthesubsequentproceedings.

Onthosegrounds,

Uponreadingthepleadings; UponhearingthereportoftheJudge-Rapporteur; Uponhearingtheparties; UponhearingtheopinionoftheAdvocate-General; HavingregardtotheStaffRegulationsofOfficialsoftheEuropeanCoaland SteelCommunity,especiallyArticles43and45; HavingregardtotheProtocolontheStatuteoftheCourtofJusticeofthe EuropeanCoalandSteelCommunity; HavingregardtotheRulesofProcedureoftheCourtofJustice,especially Articles69and70,

THECOURT(FirstChamber)

hereby:

I.Declaresthatthereisnooccasiontoproceedtojudgmentonthe conclusionscontainedintheapplication;

2.Rejectstheconclusionscontainedinthereplyasinadmissible;

3.Ordersthedefendanttopaythecostsoftheproceedingspriorto thelodgmentofthereply;

OPINIONOFMRROEMER— CASE12.12.1967

4.Orderstheapplicanttopaythecostsincurredfromthelodgmentof thereply,includingthoseincurredbythedefendant.

DonnerMonacoMertensdeWilmars

DeliveredinopencourtinLuxembourgon12December1967.

A.VanHoutte A.M.Donner Registrar PresidentoftheFirstChamber

OPINIONOFMRADVOCATE-GENERALROEMER

DELIVEREDON21NOVEMBER19671

MrPresident, dentoftheHighAuthorityrepliedina Membersof theCourt, noteof3March1967thatthereisno righttopromotion,promotionsbeing Theapplicantintheproceedingson maderatherbyselectioninaccordance whichIhavetogiveanopiniontoday withArticle45oftheStaffRegulations. isanofficialoftheEuropeanCoaland Accordingtothecase-lawoftheCount SteelCommunity.Atthe'timewhen reasonsdonothavetobegivenfor theproceedingswerebroughthewas promotiondecisionsrelatingtocan employedasaPrincipalAdministrator didateswhohavebeenpassedover; bytheHighAuthoritywhichwasthen therearethereforestillfewergrounds stillinbeing.Hehasbroughtthepresent forgivingreasonsforomissionfrom proceedingsagainsttheHighAuthority thelistofcandidatestobeconsidered afterhavingestablishedthathisname forpromotion. didnotappearinthelistofcandidates MrBauerwasnotsatisfiedwith'this

tobeconsideredforpromotion,which answer.Accordinglyhebroughthisap wasissuedon7December1966.His plicationbeforetheCourtclaimingthat applicationisnothoweverforannul itshouldannultherefusalofthePresi mentofthislistofcandidatesorfor dentofHighAuthoritytoagreethathis annulmentofthedecisionsonpro reports,inparticularthatof11May motion,butforcommunicationtohim 1966,shouldbecommunicatedtohim. oftherelevantreportsonhimself.Be ItseemsthattheofficialsoftheHigh foremakingtheapplicationheaddres Authoritydidnotgraspwithwhatthe sedalettertothePresidentoftheHigh applicantwasconcerneduntiltheap Authorityon13February1967in plicationwaslodged.Inanyeventhe whichheaskedthat,havingregardto wasthensummonedtotheDirectorof

thesecondparagraphofArticle43of Personnel,whohandedhimaphoto theStaffRegulations,hemight'ac copyofthereportof11May1966 quainthimselfwiththereport'Einsicht (therewerenootherreports).Inaddi indieBeurteilung')leadingtohisex tionattherequestoftheapplicanta clusionfromthelistofcandidatesto furthercopywassentwithaletterof beconsideredforpromotion.ThePresi- 29May1967tohisCounsel.

1—TranslatedfromtheGerman.