JUDGMENT OF 17.12.1964 — CASE 102/63 BOURSIN v HIGH AUTHORITY

In Case 102/63

THE COURT (First Chamber) composed of: R. Lecourt, President, L. Delvaux and A. Trabucchi (Rapporteur), Judges, Advocate-General: K. Roemer Registrar: A. Van Houtte

gives the following

JUDGMENT

Issues of fact and of law

I — Facts

II — Conclusions of the parties

I — declare null and void:

III — As a subsidiary claim,

III — Submissions and arguments of the parties

The ECSC and the Committee of Presidents named as parties

Admissibility of the applicant's claims

I — 1. Annulment of the refusal to keep open the applicant's career prospects

I — 2. Illegality of the Staff Regulations, especially Article 5 (4) and Annex I

II — Preservation of the applicant's career prospects up to Grade A3

III — 1. Annulment of the refusal, contained in the note of 17 October 1963, to reclassify the applicant in Grade A3

III — 2. Annulment of the integration of the applicant in so far as it involves his establishment in Grade A4

IV — Establishment of the applicant in Grade A3 with effect from 1 January 1962

V — Non-material damage to the applicant

Substance of the case

A — The refusal of the High Authority contained in its note of 17 October 1963

The argument based on lack of competence ratione temporis

(a) Admissibility

(b) Substance

The complaint of a violation of the principle of vested rights

B — The decision of the Committee of Presidents mentioned in head I — 3 of the conclusions

C — The correspondence between duties and grade

IV — Procedure

Grounds of judgment

A — The naming of the ECSC and the Committee of Presidents as defendants

B — Preservation of the applicant's career prospects

C — Admissibility of the second head of the principal conclusions and the second head of the subsidiary conclusions

D — Correspondence between duties and grade

1. Admissibility

2. The substance

E — The claim for damages

Costs