Court of Justice of the European Communities (including Court of First Instance Decisions)

You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Court of Justice of the European Communities (including Court of First Instance Decisions) >> AnnC-Maria Campogrande v Commission of the European Communities. [1973] EUECJ C-60/72 (8 May 1973)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/EUECJ/1973/C6072.html
Cite as: [1973] EUECJ C-60/72

[New search] [Help]

IMPORTANT LEGAL NOTICE - The source of this judgment is the web site of the Court of Justice of the European Communities. The information in this database has been provided free of charge and is subject to a Court of Justice of the European Communities disclaimer and a copyright notice. This electronic version is not authentic and is subject to amendment.

61972J0060
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 8 May 1973.
Anna-Maria Campogrande v Commission of the European Communities.
Case 60-72.
European Court reports 1973 Page 00489
Greek special edition 1972-1973 Page 00537
Portuguese special edition 1973 Page 00215

++++
OFFICIALS - DISPUTES WITH THE ADMINISTRATION - COMPLAINT - MEANING
( STAFF REGULATIONS, ART . 90 ( 2 )).

A LETTER BASED ON UNOFFICIAL INFORMATION, ADDRESSED TO THE COMMISSION SEVERAL WEEKS BEFORE THE NOTIFICATION OF THE CONTESTED DECISION, DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A COMPLAINT AGAINST AN ACT ADVERSELY AFFECTING AN OFFICIAL WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 90 ( 2 ) OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS .

IN CASE 60/72
ANNA MARIA CAMPOGRANDE, OFFICIAL OF THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, LIVING AT 19, AVENUE DE L'OREE, BRUSSELS, REPRESENTED BY MARCEL SLUSNY, ADVOCATE AT THE COUR D'APPEL OF BRUSSELS, HAVING CHOSEN HER ADDRESS FOR SERVICE IN LUXEMBOURG AT THE CHAMBERS OF ME ERNEST ARENDT, 34 B/4 RUE PHILIPPE-II, APPLICANT,
V
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, REPRESENTED BY ITS LEGAL ADVISER, PIERRE LAMOUREUX, ACTING AS AGENT, HAVING CHOSEN ITS ADDRESS FOR SERVICE IN LUXEMBOURG AT THE OFFICES OF ITS LEGAL ADVISER EMILE REUTER, 4 BOULEVARD ROYAL, DEFENDANT,

IN THE MATTER, AT THE PRESENT STAGE OF THE PROCEEDINGS, OF THE ADMISSIBILITY OF THE APPLICATION FOR THE ANNULMENT OF THE PROCEDURE OF COMPETITION COM/A/264, INCLUDING THE NOTICE OF COMPETITION, AND ALSO OF THE PROCEDURES OF COMPETITIONS COM/A/265, COM/A/266, COM/A/267, COM/A/268, INCLUDING THE NOTICES OF COMPETITION,

1 THE APPLICANT, BY APPLICATION LODGED IN THE COURT REGISTRY ON 28 AUGUST 1972, REQUESTS THE ANNULMENT OF A SERIES OF INTERNAL COMPETITIONS, TOGETHER WITH THE COMPETITION NOTICES RELATIVE THERETO, INSTITUTED BY THE COMMISSION IN 1971 WITH A VIEW TO FILLING VACANT POSTS FOR ADMINISTRATORS IN CAREER BRACKET A7/A6 .
2 THE COMMISSION, DEFENDANT IN THE MAIN ACTION, HAS RAISED AN OBJECTION OF INADMISSIBILITY BASED ON NON-OBSERVANCE OF ARTICLE 91 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS .
3 PARAGRAPH 2 OF THIS ARTICLE, AS AMENDED BY REGULATION NO 1473/72 OF 1 JULY 1972, PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ON 16 JULY 1972, MAKES THE ADMISSIBILITY OF AN APPLICATION TO THE COURT OF JUSTICE DEPENDENT UPON THE PRIOR SUBMISSION BY THE APPLICANT TO THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY OF A COMPLAINT WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 90 ( 2 ) AGAINST AN ACT ADVERSELY AFFECTING HIM .
4 THE QUESTION OF ADMISSIBILITY MUST BE RESOLVED ON THE BASIS OF THE RULES IN FORCE AT THE DATE ON WHICH THE APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED .
5 THE FIRST STEP IS ACCORDINGLY TO CONSIDER WHETHER THE APPLICANT HAS SUBMITTED TO THE COMMISSION A PRIOR COMPLAINT AGAINST AN ACT ADVERSELY AFFECTING HER .
6 ON THIS POINT THE APPLICANT RELIES UPON A LETTER WHICH SHE ADDRESSED ON 18 MAY 1972 TO THE MEMBER OF THE COMMISSION RESPONSIBLE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS .
7 THIS LETTER WAS BASED, ACCORDING TO THE APPLICANT' S OWN STATEMENTS, ON CERTAIN INFORMATION WHICH HAD COME TO HER, BUT OF WHICH SHE DOES NOT GIVE THE SOURCE .
8 THE RESULT OF HER PERFORMANCE IN THE COMPETITION WAS NOT, HOWEVER, NOTIFIED TO THE APPLICANT UNTIL 15 JUNE, THAT IS SEVERAL WEEKS AFTER THE DISPATCH OF THE ABOVEMENTIONED LETTER .
9 UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THIS LETTER CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS A COMPLAINT AGAINST AN ACT ADVERSELY AFFECTING THE APPLICANT .
10 THE APPLICATION IS ACCORDINGLY INADMISSIBLE UNDER THE TERMS OF ARTICLE 91 ( 2 ) OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS .

11 THE APPLICANT HAS FAILED IN HER APPLICATION .
12 UNDER THE TERMS OF ARTICLE 69 ( 2 ) OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE THE UNSUCCESSFUL PARTY SHALL BE ORDERED TO PAY THE COSTS .
13 HOWEVER, UNDER THE TERMS OF ARTICLE 70 OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE, THE COSTS INCURRED BY THE INSTITUTIONS IN APPLICATIONS BY SERVANTS OF THE COMMUNITIES ARE BORNE BY THE INSTITUTIONS .

THE COURT ( SECOND CHAMBER )
HEREBY :
1 . DISMISSES THE ACTION AS INADMISSIBLE;
2 . ORDERS EACH PARTY TO BEAR ITS OWN COSTS .

About BAILII - FAQ - Copyright Policy - Disclaimers - Privacy Policy amended on 25/11/2010