ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE FIRST CHAMBER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
7 March 2007(*)
(Intervention – Dismissal – Application to intervene lodged after opening of the oral procedure)
In Case T-45/01,
Stephen G. Sanders, with an address for service in London (United Kingdom) and the 94 applicants whose names appear in the annex, represented by P. Roth QC, and I. Hutton, A. Howard and E. Mitrophanous, Barristers,
applicant,
v
Commission of the European Communities, represented by J. Currall, acting as Agent,
defendant,
supported by
Council of the European Union, represented by J.-P. Hix and B. Driessen, acting as Agents,
intervener,
APPLICATION pursuant to the judgment of the Court of 5 October 2004 in Case T-45/01 Sanders and Others v Commission for damages for the financial loss sustained by each of the applicants as a result of the fact that they were not recruited as temporary staff of the Communities for the time they worked at the Joint European Torus (JET) Joint Undertaking,
THE PRESIDENT OF THE FIRST CHAMBER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
makes the following
Order
1 By application lodged at the Court Registry on 27 February 2007, the United Kingdom sought leave to intervene in the present case in support of the form of sought by the applicants.
2 In accordance with Article 115(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance an application to intervene must be made either within six weeks of the publication of the notice referred to in Article 24(6) or, subject to Article 116(6), before the decision to open the oral procedure as provided for in Article 53.
3 Thus, Article 115(1) read with Article 116(6) of the Rules of Procedure allows parties to intervene on the basis of the Report for the Hearing during the oral procedure, subject to their application to intervene being lodged before the opening thereof (see order of the Court of First Instance in Case T‑52/00 Coe Clerici Logistics v Commission [2002] ECR II‑2553, paragraph 25).
4 In the present case, the decision to open the oral procedure was taken by the Chamber on 4 December 2006.
5 The application to intervene having been lodged after the opening of the oral procedure must therefore be dismissed without the same being served on the main parties.
Costs
6 Under Article 87(1) of the Rules of Procedure, the decision as to costs is to be given in the final judgment or in the order which closes proceedings. Since the present order closes the proceedings with respect to the applicant to intervene, it is appropriate to give a decision on the costs relating to its application for leave to intervene.
7 As the present order was adopted prior to service of the application for leave to intervene on the main parties and before the latter could have incurred costs, it is sufficient to decide that the applicant to intervene must bear its own costs.
On those grounds,
THE PRESIDENT OF THE FIRST CHAMBER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
hereby orders:
1. The application for leave to intervene in Case T-45/01 lodged by the United Kingdom is dismissed.
2. The United Kingdom shall bear its own costs.
Luxembourg, 7 March 2007.