F. Bolognese and others v H. Scharf and Commission of the European Communities. (Procedure ) [1987] EUECJ C-292/84T (22 September 1987)

F. Bolognese and others v H. Scharf and Commission of the European Communities. (Procedure ) [1987] EUECJ C-292/84T (22 September 1987)

The application for third-party proceedings was inadmissible because the applicants failed to demonstrate that the contested judgment was prejudicial to any of their rights under the Staff Regulations; the annulled decision concerned a post for which they were not candidates, and the interpretation of Article 45(2) in the judgment binds only the original parties.

Citation
[1987] EUECJ C-292/84T
Parties
Applicants: F. Bolognese and others; Defendant: H. Scharf; Defendant: Commission of the European Communities
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
22 September 1987
Procedural Posture
Third Party Proceedings / Order on Admissibility
Outcome
Application dismissed as inadmissible.
Legal Topics
Third Party Proceedings, Admissibility, Staff Regulations, Res Judicata
European Union Law Administrative Law Third Party Proceedings Admissibility Staff Regulations Res Judicata

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

F. Bolognese and others

Applicants

H. Scharf

Defendant

Commission of the European Communities

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Third Party Proceedings / Order on Admissibility

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the third-party application to set aside the judgment in Joined Cases 269 and 292/84 is admissible under Article 39 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the EEC and Article 97(1) of the Rules of Procedure.

Ratio Decidendi

The application for third-party proceedings was inadmissible because the applicants failed to demonstrate that the contested judgment was prejudicial to any of their rights under the Staff Regulations; the annulled decision concerned a post for which they were not candidates, and the interpretation of Article 45(2) in the judgment binds only the original parties.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed as inadmissible.

Orders

  • The application originating third-party proceedings is dismissed as inadmissible.
  • The third parties are ordered to bear their own costs and the costs of the applicant in the original proceedings.