T-163/97

Council of the European Union, represented by Ramon Torrent, Jürgen Huber and Guus Houttuin, Director and Legal Advisers respectively in its Legal Service, acting as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of Alessandro Morbilli, Director-General of the Legal Affairs Directorate of the European Investment Bank, 100 Boulevard Konrad Adenauer,

defendant in Cases T-163/97 and T-179/97,

and

* Language of the case: Dutch.

II - 4124

NETHERLANDS ANTILLES v COUNCIL AND COMMISSION

intervener in Case T-163/97,

and

Commission of the European Communities, represented by Pieter J. Kuijper and Thomas van Rijn, Legal Advisers, acting as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gómez de la Cruz, of its Legal Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg,

intervener in Case T-179/97,

II - 4125

ORDER OF 16. 11. 1998 — JOINED CASES T-163/97 AND T-179/97

1 By application lodged at the Registry of the Court of First Instance on 23 May 1997, registered under number T-163/97, the applicant brought an action against the Council and the Commission, on the one hand, for the annulment of Commis- sion Regulation (EC) N o 764/97 of 23 April 1997 introducing safeguard measures in respect of imports of rice originating in the overseas countries and territories (OJ 1997 L 112, p. 3), and, on the other hand, for compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the applicant following the adoption of that regulation and

II - 4126

NETHERLANDS ANTILLES v COUNCIL AND COMMISSION

Council Regulation (EC) N o 1036/97 of 2 June 1997 introducing safeguard mea- sures in respect of imports of rice originating in the overseas countries and terri- tories (OJ 1997 L 151, p. 8, 'Regulation N o 1036/97')·

2 By application lodged at the Registry of the Court of First Instance on 11 June 1997, registered under number T-179/97, it also brought an action against the Council for the annulment of Regulation N o 1036/97.

3 By orders of 5 August 1997, the Kingdom of Spain was granted leave to intervene in support of the forms of order sought by the Council and the Commission in Case T-163/97, and the Council in Case T-179/97, respectively.

8 Since the actions brought in Cases T-179/97 and C-301/97 both sought the annul- ment of Regulation N o 1036/97, and Cases T-163/97 and T-179/97 had been joined, the parties were heard on the questions whether the latter two cases should be disjoined and whether the Court of First Instance should stay the proceedings or decline jurisdiction in those cases.

9 It must be stated in this regard that, even though the relief sought in Case T-163/97 is not strictly identical to that sought in Case C-301/97, the applicant bases the application for compensation made to the Court of First Instance, inter aim, on the adoption of Regulation N o 1036/97, the very regulation whose annul- ment is sought in the case pending before the Court of Justice.

10 It must also be pointed out that the second paragraph of Article 37 of the E C Statute of the Court of Justice, applicable to the procedure before the Court of First Instance by virtue of Article 46 of that Statute, precludes natural or legal per- sons from intervening in disputes between Member States, on the one hand, and institutions of the Community, on the other hand. The only possibility for natural or legal persons to put forward their arguments in disputes which concern them is therefore to bring an action themselves, in cases in which they have standing to do so, before the competent court (see the order of the Court of First Instance in Case T-490/93 Bremer Vulkan Verbund v Commission [1995] E C R II-477, para- graph 12).

1 1 Since the Court of Justice has not stayed the proceedings before it in Case C-301/97, pursuant to the third paragraph of Article 47 of its Statute, it is in the interests of the proper administration of justice that the court with jurisdiction to hear and determine the action brought by a Member State should be able to take into consideration the various pleas in law and factual and legal arguments relied upon by the natural or legal persons concerned in support of their applications for annulment of the same act.

hereby orders:

1. Cases T-163/97, Netherlands Antilles v Council and Commission, and T-79/97, Netherlands Antilles v Council, are disjoined.

2. The proceedings in Case T-163/97, Netherlands Antilles v Council and Com- mission, are stayed pending delivery of judgment by the Court of Justice in Case C-301/97, Netherhnds v Council.

II - 4129

ORDER OF 16. 11. 1998 —JOINED CASES T-163/97 AND T-179/97

3. The Court of First Instance declines jurisdiction in Case T-179/97, Nether- ynds Antilles v Council, in favour of the Court of Justice in order to enable the latter to give judgment on the applications for annulment.