C-48/79
ECLI:EU:C:1979:115
- Súd
- Súdny dvor Európskej únie
- IČS
- 61979CO0048
- Zdroj
- eur-lex.europa.eu ↗
ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE COURT OF 6 APRIL 1979 1
Marinus Ooms and Others v Commission of the European Communities
Case 48 /79 R
In Case 48/79 R
MARINUS Ooms, Nicolas Hazes, Peter Hansen, Johannes WILLEM HOFMAN, Alberto Domenico Caretta, Georges Rene Hervo, Roger BUYL, Frans QUIK, BASTIAN Stal, Officials of the Commission of the European Communities, represented by Victor Biel, of the Luxembourg Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the latter's Chambers, 18 A Rue des Glacis,
applicants,
Commission of the European Communities , , represented by its Legal Adviser Joseph Griesmar, acting as Agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of Mario Cervino, Legal Adviser to the Commission, Jean Monnet Building, Kirchberg,
defendant,
APPLICATION to suspend the application of Council Regulation (Euratom, ECSC, EEC) No 3085/78 of 21 December 1978 and of Council Regulation (Euratom, ECSC, EEC) No 3086/78 of 21 December 1978 (Official Journal No L 309 of 29 December 1978),
The President of the First Chamber of the Court
acting as President of the Court,
makes the following
1 — Language of the Cast: French.
ORDER OF 6. 4. 1979 - CASE 48/79 R
ORDER
Facts and Issues
By an application lodged at the Court officials and other servants from the Registry on 26 March 1979 the Member State or other country in which applicants applied primarily for the they are employed to the Member State annulment of Council Regulation of origin. (Euratom. ECSC, EEC) No 3085/78 of 21 December 1978 amending, with Regulation No 3086/78 lays down, with particular reference to the monetary effect from 1 April 1979, the weightings parities to be used, Regulation (EEC, applicable to the remuneration and Euratom, ECSC) No 259/68 laying pensions of officials and other servants down the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities. of the European Communities and the Both the above-mentioned regulations conditions of employment of other take effect from 1 April 1979. servants of these Communities, Regu lation (Euratom, ECSC. EEC) No The applicants claim that they are 2530/72 and Regulation (ECSC, EEC, suffering losses as a result of the Euratom) No 1543/73 concerning aforesaid measures and in support of certain special measures (Official Journal their application for the adoption of an No L 369, page 6) and the annulment of interim measure they state that the Council Regulation (Euratom, ECSC, application of the disputed regulations is EEC) No 3086/78 of 21 December 1978 necessarily causing them direct, adjusting the weightings applicable to the immediate and irreparable damage in as remuneration and pensions of officials much as the real value of their remuner and other servants of the European ation undergoes as from 1 April 1979 a Communities following the amendment reduction of such an extent that they can of the provisions of the Staff Regulations no longer comply with their financial concerning the monetary parities to be obligations. used in implementing the Staff Regu In its observations lodged at the Court lations (Official Journal No L 369, page 8). Registry on 4 April 1979 the Commission contends that the President of the Court should dismiss the application for the By a separate document accompanying adoption of an interim measure as their application they further made an inadmissible and in any case as application for the adoption of an unfounded. interim measure ordering that the application of the above-mentioned regu The Commission claims that the lations should be suspended. application for the adoption of an interim measure is inadmissible on the Article 1 of Regulation No 3085/78 ground that the main action is manifestly amends Article 63 of the Staff Regu inadmissible inasmuch as, to the extent lations and Article 2 amends Article 17 to which it is based on Articles 90 and 91 of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations of the Staff Regulations, it is directed and lays down fresh parities as regards against acts which do not emanate from the exchange rate applicable to transfers the applicants' appointing authority and of a portion of the remuneration of that, to the extent to which it is based ooms v commission
upon Article 173 of the EEC Treaty, the establishing a prima facie case for the period within which proceedings may be interim measures applied for. The brought has expired; furthermore, it is damage of which the applicants complain inadmissible for the officials to claim the is neither grave nor irreparable and the annulment of Council Regulations submissions put forward in support of concerning in a general and abstract the main action are manifestly manner their rights under the Staff Regu unfounded. lations. The parties ask that costs should be The Commission further states that reserved. according to Article 83 (2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court, the The parties put forward oral argument at suspension of application of a measure is the hearing of the application for the subject to the existence of circumstances adoption of an interim measure on giving rise to urgency and to grounds 6 April 1979.
Decision
According to Article 83 (2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court the suspension of the operation of the disputed measure is subject to the existence of circumstances giving rise to urgency and of grounds establishing a prima facte case for the adoption of such a measure.
2 The disputed regulations have the effect of making less favourable than pre viously the exchange rate applicable to certain transfers of sums which the applicants may effect under the Staff Regulations.
3 If the contested measures were annulled the only result would be that the Commission would owe supplementary amounts to which the applicants would then be entitled.
4 There is no need to consider whether the grounds put forward against the admissibility of the main action are of such a nature as to impugn the admissibility of the application for the adoption of an interim measure as it is sufficient to record that even if there were to be an annulment the mere delay in payment would not be of such a nature as to cause the applicants irreparable damage.
ORDER OF 6. 4. 1979 — CASE 48/79 R
5 The application must therefore be dismissed.
Costs
6 In the circumstances costs should be reserved.
On those grounds,
The President of the First Chamber of THE Court,
Acting as President of the Court,
by way of interlocutory decision hereby orders as follows:
1. The application is dismissed.
2. Costs are reserved.
Luxembourg, 6 April 1979.
J. A. Pompe J. Mertens de Wilmars Deputy Registrar President of the First Chamber, acting as President of the Court