Giorgio Pincherle v Commission of the European Communities: ECJ 22 Dec 1993

ECJ 1. It follows from Article 49 of the EEC Statute of the Court of Justice that interveners before the Court of First Instance are regarded as parties before that court. Accordingly, where an appeal is brought against the judgment of the Court of First Instance, Article 115(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice applies to those interveners, and they are therefore not required to submit a fresh application for leave to intervene before the Court of Justice in accordance with Articles 93 and 123 of the Rules of Procedure. 2. In providing that an official, his spouse and his dependants are insured against sickness up to 80% of the expenditure incurred subject to rules drawn up by agreement between the institutions of the Communities, and that that ceiling is increased to 85% for certain services, Article 72(1) of the Staff Regulations establishes the maximum rate of reimbursement to which those covered by the Joint Sickness Scheme are entitled. For the remainder, that provision leaves it to the institutions to fix the reimbursement ceilings by agreement between them in the context of those rules, without prescribing any minimum thresholds. 3. In an appeal, a plea in law directed against a superabundant ground of a judgment of the Court of First Instance, the operative part of which is sufficiently based on other grounds, must be rejected.

Citations:

C-244/91, [1993] EUECJ C-244/91P

Links:

Bailii

European, Litigation Practice

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160784