C-62/74
ECLI:EU:C:1974:88
- Súd
- Súdny dvor Európskej únie
- IČS
- 61974CO0062
- Zdroj
- eur-lex.europa.eu ↗
ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE SECOND CHAMBER
OF THE COURT
17 SEPTEMBER 1974 1
Luigi Vellozzi v Commission of the European Communities
Case 62/74 R
In Case 62/74 R
Luigi Vellozzi, an official of the Commission of the European Communities, respresented by Emile Drappier, advocate at the Cour d'appel of Brussels, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the chambers of Ernest Arendt, 34 B rue Philippe II,
applicant, v
Commission of the European Communities, represented by its Legal Adviser, Thomas F. Cusack, acting as agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of P. Lamoureux, Legal Adviser to the Commission, 4 boulevard Royal,
defendant,
Application to suspend the operation of the measure suspending payment of remuneration, adopted on the basis of Article 60 of the Staff Regulations of officials,
The President of the Second Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Communities
makes the following
1 — Language of the Case: French.
ORDER OF 17. 9. 1974 — CASE 62/74 R
ORDER
The Head of the 'Individual Rights and authority administrative complaints in Privileges' Division, in his capacity as respect of these decisions. appointing authority, having established that the Commission's medical service By application lodged at the Registry of the Court on 23 August 1974, the had found Mr Vellozzi fit for work, applicant asked the Court to annul the informed him by letter of 3 April 1974 decisions contained in the letters of 3 that, in accordance with Article 60 of the April, 10 and 14 May, and 11 July 1974. Staff Regulations of officials, any absence on his part would be deducted By a separate document accompanying first from his annual leave, and the main application he made in addition thereafter from his remuneration. After an interim application for an order to fresh examinations by the Commission's suspend the operation of the measure medical service this decision was suspending payment of his remunera confirmed by letters dated 10 and 14 tion. May 1974. In a letter to the applicant of 11 July 1974 the appointing authority In a document lodged at the Registry on confirmed that his absence, which was 4 September 1974, in accordance with held to be unauthorized, gave rise to the Article 83 (1) of the Rules of Procedure, the Commission stated that it would application of Article 60 of the Staff leave to the wisdom of the Court the Regulations and that, as he had used up his annual leave for 1974, his decision as to the applicant's interim remuneration for the month of July had application. been withheld as a precautionary The parties presented their oral measure. observations at the hearing on the On 16 May and 5 August 1974, the interim application on 16 September applicant submitted to the appointing 1974.
Law
1 Under Article 83 (2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court, 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 In support of his interim application, the applicant has asserted that the implementation of the Commission's decision would deprive him of his means of subsistence, which have, until now, been his remuneration.
3 At this stage in the procedure, it is impossible to foresee the outcome of the main action.
VELLOZZI v COMMISSION
4 If the applicant succeeds in his pleas, he will be entitled to payment of the remuneration withheld by the decision of the Commission.
5 If, on the other hand, the Court having ordered the Commission to suspend the operation of its decision, the applicant were to fail in the main action, the Commission would be authorized, in pursuance of Article 85 of the Staff Regulations of officials, to recover any sums paid in error.
6 Until such time as the Court gives its judgment the operation of the Commission's decision is, therefore, not of such a nature, despite the allegedly difficult situation in which the applicant is placed, as to cause serious or irreparable damage to his rights and interests.
7 Consequently, his interim application must be dismissed.
8 Costs
It is appropriate, at this stage, to reserve costs.
On those grounds,
The President
as an interim ruling,
orders
1. The interim application is dismissed; 2. The costs are reserved.
Done and ordered in Luxembourg on 17 September 1974.
A. Van Houtte Max Sørensen
Registrar President of the Second Chamber