1 BY APPLICATION SUBMITTED ON 6 MARCH 1974, THE GENERAL UNION OF PERSONNEL OF EUROPEAN ORGANIZATIONS ( OFFICIAL ENGLISH TITLE ) ASKED THE COURT TO ANNUL A DECISION OF THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ON 21 SEPTEMBER 1973 ARRANGING FOR A DEDUCTION TO BE MADE FROM THE SALARY OF OFFICIALS AND OTHER SERVANTS OF THE COMMISSION WHO TOOK PART IN THE STRIKES IN NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER 1972 .
2 THE APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED UNDER ARTICLE 91 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS AND ARTICLE 173 OF THE EEC TREATY BUT DURING THE COURSE OF PROCEEDINGS THE APPLICANT WITHDREW THE PLEA BASED ON THE TREATY .
3 BY WRITTEN SUBMISSION OF 5 APRIL 1974, THE DEFENDANT COMMISSION RAISED A PLEA OF INADMISSIBILITY AND ASKED THE COURT TO RULE ON IT WITHOUT ENTERING INTO THE MERITS .
4 THE COMMISSION CLAIMS, FIRSTLY, THAT THE APPLICANT UNION LACKS CAPACITY TO INSTITUTE PROCEEDINGS .
5 UNDER ARTICLE 24 A OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS OFFICIALS ENJOY THE RIGHT OF ASSOCIATION AND, IN PARTICULAR, MAY BE MEMBERS OF TRADE UNIONS OR STAFF ASSOCIATIONS OF EUROPEAN OFFICIALS .
6 THE APPLICANT UNION IS AN ASSOCIATION ORGANIZING A SUBSTANTIAL NUMBER OF OFFICIALS AND SERVANTS OF THE COMMUNITY INSTITUTIONS AND COMPONENT BODIES ESTABLISHED IN LUXEMBOURG AND THERE IS NO REASON TO DOUBT ITS REPRESENTATIVE CHARACTER .
7 UNDER ITS RULES, ITS CONSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE IS SUCH AS TO ENDOW IT WITH THE NECESSARY INDEPENDENCE TO ACT AS A RESPONSIBLE BODY IN LEGAL MATTERS .
8 THE COMMISSION OFFICIALLY RECOGNIZES IT AS A NEGOTIATING BODY ON QUESTIONS INVOLVING THE COLLECTIVE INTERESTS OF THE STAFF .
9 IT IS, THEREFORE, IMPOSSIBLE TO DENY THE APPLICANT UNION'S CAPACITY TO INSTITUTE PROCEEDINGS .
10 UNDER THE GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF LABOUR LAW, THE FREEDOM OF TRADE UNION ACTIVITY RECOGNIZED UNDER ARTICLE 24 A OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS MEANS NOT ONLY THAT OFFICIALS AND SERVANTS HAVE THE RIGHT WITHOUT HINDRANCE TO FORM ASSOCIATIONS OF THEIR OWN CHOOSING, BUT ALSO THAT THESE ASSOCIATIONS ARE FREE TO DO ANYTHING LAWFUL TO PROTECT THE INTERESTS OF THEIR MEMBERS AS EMPLOYEES .
11 THE RIGHT OF ACTION IS ONE OF THE MEANS AVAILABLE FOR USE BY THESE ASSOCIATIONS .
12 UNDER THE COMMUNITY LEGAL SYSTEM, HOWEVER, THE EXERCISE OF THIS RIGHT IS SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS DETERMINED BY THE SYSTEM OF FORMS OF ACTION PROVIDED FOR UNDER THE TREATIES ESTABLISHING THE COMMUNITIES .
13 THUS A STAFF ASSOCIATION WHICH FULFILS THESE CONDITIONS IS ENTITLED, BY VIRTUE OF THE SECOND PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 173 OF THE EEC TREATY, TO INSTITUTE PROCEEDINGS FOR ANNULMENT AGAINST A DECISION ADDRESSED TO IT WITHIN THE MEANING OF THAT PROVISION .
14 ON THE OTHER HAND, THE BRINGING OF A DIRECT ACTION IS INADMISSIBLE UNDER THE ARRANGEMENTS PROVIDED UNDER ARTICLES 90 AND 91 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS FOR PROCEEDINGS TO BE BROUGHT BEFORE THE COURT, INSOFAR AS THESE PROVISIONS GIVE EFFECT TO ARTICLE 179 OF THE EEC TREATY AND THE CORRESPONDING ARTICLES OF THE ECSC AND THE EAEC TREATIES .
15 THOUGH ARTICLE 179 IS AVAILABLE AS A BASIS ON WHICH ARRANGEMENTS MAY BE MADE FOR SETTLEMENT BY THE COURT OF COLLECTIVE AS WELL AS INDIVIDUAL DISPUTES BETWEEN THE COMMUNITY AND ITS SERVANTS, THIS DOES NOT ALTER THE FACT THAT THE PROCEDURE FOR COMPLAINT AND APPEAL ESTABLISHED BY ARTICLES 90 AND 91 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS IS DESIGNED TO DEAL EXCLUSIVELY WITH INDIVIDUAL DISPUTES .
16 THIS MEANS THAT THE CHANNEL OF APPEAL PROVIDED FOR UNDER ARTICLE 91 IS AVAILABLE ONLY TO OFFICIALS OR SERVANTS .
17 UNDER THE SECOND PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 37 OF THE STATUTE OF THE COURT, THE RIGHT TO INTERVENE IS, ON THE OTHER HAND, OPEN TO ANY PERSON ESTABLISHING A LEGITIMATE INTEREST IN THE RESULT OF ANY CASE SUBMITTED TO THE COURT, INCLUDING THOSE COMING UNDER ARTICLE 91 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS .
18 IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THIS CASE, THEREFORE, AS TO THE FACTS AND TO THE LAW, THE COURT HAS NO JURISDICTION TO ENTERTAIN A DIRECT ACTION BROUGHT BY A STAFF ASSOCIATION UNDER ARTICLE 91 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS .
19 THE APPLICATION MUST THEREFORE BE DISMISSED AS INADMISSIBLE .
20 BY ARTICLE 69 ( 2 ) OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE, THE UNSUCCESSFUL PARTY SHALL BE ORDERED TO PAY THE COSTS .
21 IN VIEW, HOWEVER, OF THE GENERAL INTEREST OF THE ISSUE WHICH HAS BEEN RAISED, EACH PARTY SHOULD BEAR ITS OWN COSTS .
ON THOSE GROUNDS,
THE COURT
HEREBY :
1 . DISMISSES THE APPLICATION AS INADMISSIBLE,
2 . ORDERS EACH PARTY TO BEAR ITS OWN COSTS .
