(1988)1988November16 [PIKIS, J.] INTHEMATTER OFARTICLE 146OFTHE CONSTITUTION 1.MARIA SIMILLI, 2.PANAYIOTIS SIMILI, Applicants, v. THEREPUBLICOFCYPRUS,THROUGH 1.THEEDUCATIONALSERVICECOMMISSION, 2.THEMINISTRYOFEDUCATION, Respondents. {CaseNo.813/88). Provisionalorder—irreparabledamage—Whattheconceptconnotes—Damage thatisinthepowerofanapplicanttoavoidorremedy—Canhardlyqualify asirreparable—inthiscaseapplicantfailedtoestablishthatifhissubjudice transferisnotsuspended,hewouldsuffersuch adamage. Legitimateinterest—Moral interest—Must notbeassimilated with inconvenienceoremotionalupset. Provisionalorder—Publicinterest—Mustbeponderedateverystageofthereviewoftheactinquestion. / Publicinterest—Itsimpactmustbeponderedateverystageof thereviewof theadministrativeaction. 10 Practice—Recourseforannulment—Misjoinderofcausesofaction—Effect. Thetwoapplicantsarehusbandandwife.Theyarebotheducationalofficers. Thehusband wastransferred toKokkinotrimithia.ThewifetoLarnaca.Theactsoftransferweredistinctofeachother. Theapplicants'homeisat Strovolos.Thetransfers madelife difficult 2112 15 3 C.L.R. 5 Similli & Another v. Republic for thefamily, noless for thehusband,whohad to transport daily the two childrenoftheapplicants toAglandjia, wheretheirschoolsaresituated.The difficulties wouldhavebeen reduced, ifthechildren hadbeen transferred to schools near their home. The applicants, however, chose to keep diem at theirschoolsat Aglandjia. Thisisan application for provisional ordersuspending theeffect of the transferof thehusbandongroundof irreparabledamage. 10 Counsel for the respondents raised the issue of misjoinder in one recourse of twodistinct and separateacts. Theissue,however, wasnot can· vassedatanydepth. Held, dismissing the application:
(1)Misjoinder of causes of actions does notinexorably invalidate theproceedings*.Inany event competence isacknowledged to theCourt todeal with the first cause sought to be reviewed. , 15
(2)Damage or injury that is in thepower of an applicant to avoid can hardly qualify as irreparable.Theconcept of irreparable damage connotes financial ormoral injury which isirreversible inthesense that such injury cannotberemedied byanyof thereliefs availabletoafinallysuccessful applicantor byappropriateadministrative action consequential to annulment oftheactinquestion. 20
(3)The impactofpublic interest mustbeassessed atevery stageof the review of anadministrative action.Suspension ofthetransfer would entail a number of other transfers in order to restore thestatus quo ante and the vacuum thatwillbecreated. 25
(4)Moral interest mustnotbeassimilated topersonal inconvenience or emotional upset.Moreover, itmustnotbeconfused with moral obligations toothers. ' '
(5)In thiscasetheapplicant failed toestablish irreparabledamage. Applicationdismissed. , . No orderas tocosts. 30 * CivilProcedureRules,0.9 R.10,0.64 and 0.13 R.7., 2113 Similli &Another v. Republic
(1988)Application for a provisional order. Application byapplicantNo.2foraprovisionalordersuspendinghistransfer from NicosiatoKokkinotrimithia ongroundsof irreparabledamage. AS. AngelideSy for applicant. 5 R.Petridou (Mrs.), for the respondents. Cur. adv. vult. PIKISJ.readthefollowingjudgment.Thisisacombinedactionofwifeandhusband,co-applicants,fortheannulmentoftwo distinctactsoftheadministrationentailingtheirtransferfromNicosiaschoolstoLarnacaandKokkinotrimithia,respectively.Notwithstandingtheseparatenessoftheimpugnedacts,thetwocauses werejoined in one action in order to focus attention on the cumulativeadverseeffects ofthetwotransfersonthefamilyunitingtheapplicantsinthe.ventilationofasharedgrievance. J-*J Whatweareconcernedtodecideatthisstageisanapplication of thehusband tosuspend histransfer ongroundsof irreparable damage.Nosuggestion ismadethattheactisflagrantly illegal. Thedamagederivesfrom hardshiptothefamily anddeprivation tothechildren likely tobesuffered from lackofpropercareand 20 attention.Husband and wife served in theelementary education (Headmaster)andsecondaryeducation,respectively. Thedailyabsencefor longhoursofbothparentsfromthefamilyhomeatStrovolosmakeslifedifficult foreverymemberofthe family, no less for the applicant (husband) who has to convey 25 everymorningthetwochildrentoschoolsin theAglandjia area beforetravellingtoKokkinotrimithia wherehewasposted,entailing a drive of approximately 20 minutes from Nicosia. In the course of the hearing the applicant acknowledged through his counselthatthedifficulties wouldbereducedifthechildrenwere 30 transferred to schools neartheirhome. Nevertheless,theappli2114 3 C.L.R. s ,Q Similli &Another v. Republic Pikis J. cantandhiswifechose tokeep,thematschools atAglandjia,in orderto accommodatethewishesof thechildren to-remainnear theirfriends. Theoneof thetwochildrenattendsthefirst classof me,Gymnasiumandtheotheris apupilof theElementarySchool. Thechildrenattendedschools inthatareabecause theirfather before histransfer toKokkinotrimithia served.at aschool atAgland jia,afact thatmadeiteasyfor himtoconvey themtoschoolsnear the school where heserved. Itis apparent thatpartof the diffi culties of thefamily areof theirownchoosing. Naturally,damage orinjury, thatis inthepower of the.applicanttoavoid orremedy canhardly ever qualify as,irreparable.Theconceptof irreparable damage connotesfinancial ormoralinjury, theeffects of which, areirreversible inthesense thatthey cannotberemedied by any of thereliefs available toa,successful party inarecourse under Art. 146,or by administrative actionsequentialthereto. Counsel for the.Republic submitted thattheapplication is illfounded mainly for thefollowingreasons: ;i (a) Thejoinderof theplaintiffs andtheirgrievances inone,ac. tionrenderedtherecourse abortive because of theseparateness of 2Q theircauses.Forhispartcounsel for theapplicant submitted.that notwithstanding theseparateness of thetwodecisions challenged, joinder was permissible because theactsemanatedfrom thesame authorityandtherepercussionsstemming therefrom afflicted both applicants. . . . . 25 (b) Thepersonal hardshiptotheapplicantcannotbeallowed to override public interest thatdictatesintheabsence of exceptional circumstances thattheadministrative processshould notbeupset; and .- - , ν .. ; , , ... (c)Thedamage totheapplicantcharacterizedtobeof amoral ^Q · naturedoesnotqualify asinjury thatwarrants theinterventionof theCourtby.means of aprovisional order.Counselfor theappli-i cantrepliedmatfinancial lossis nottheonly base uponwhich a claim for irreparable damage may^be granted. Theplea,hesub mitted, maybefounded onirreparable moraldamagetoo. 2115 Pikis J. Similli & Another v.Republic
(1988)Unrelatedcausesofactionbydifferent partiescannot bejoined in the sameproceeding.Thisisthe position under theCivil Procedure Rules adopted mutatis mutandis by Rule 18 (Supreme Constitutional Court Rules 1962)andtheadjectival law applicable to administrative disputes(SeeProfessor Tsatsos,Application for 5 Annulment before the Council of State, 1951,page 357, para. 175). In accordance with the provisions of Ord. 9, r. 10, Civil Procedure Rule Law, misjoinder of parties does not inexorably invalidate the proceeding. The Court has discretion todeal with the matter in such a way as the interests ofjustice warrant. This ,« position conforms tothe general ruleincorporated in Ord. 64respecting the effects of non-compliance with the Rules (See also Ord. 13, r.7, with regard to the implications of misjoinder of causes of action). The relevant principles emerging from Greek caselaw identified byProfessor Tsatsos, are broadly of a similar effect. Misjoinder does not entail theinvalidation of theproceedings assuch; the action surviveswithcompetence acknowledged to the Court todeal at least with the first cause sought tobereviewed. In thiscase the first complaint relates tothedecision affecting the husband, theapplicant, for aprovisional order. The question of misjoinder was not canvassed to any depth nor doIfeel ready topronounce on the implications of whatappears tobeamisjoinder by thecombination inthesame recourse of twoseparateanddistinct acts.Ishall,therefore, proceed toexaminetheremainingaspectsoftheapplication. PUBLIC INTEREST Administrative action is ex hypothesi intended to serve and promote public interest. Public interest is at the core of administrative action. Its impact must be assessed at every stage of review of administrative action. As Professor Skouris explains (Temporary Protection in theDomain ofPublic Law, 1979,p.66) publicinterest isajuridical conceptthattheCourtmustponderex officio atevery stageincluding thestage atwhich preliminaryrelief issought.Ponderation ofpublicinterest inthecontext of this application compels us to reflect upon the implications of sus- 35 2116 3 C.L.R. 5 Similli &Another v.Republic Pikis J. pending thetransfer of theapplicant.Thiswould inevitably have theeffect orrestoring thestatusquoante.Applicant would have toreturn to his duties at the school where hepreviously served, his successor would have tobetransferred toor bepositioned in another school andfurthermore provision would have tobemade for hisreplacement at Kokkinotrimithia. MORAL INTEREST. 10 15 Prejudice to moral interest legitimizes recourse to the Court andjustifies in an appropriate case suspension of the decision pending determination of the action. Moral interest must not be assimilated topersonalinconvenience oremotional upset.Moreover, itmustnot beconfused withmoralobligations toothers.The prejudice, be it moral, must derive from the decision itself and mustpersonally affect thesubject of administrative action.Idoubt whetherpersonal difficulties assuch,of thenaturecomplained of by the applicant in this case can ever justify injunctive relief. Nonetheless I shall confine myself to noting that nothing in the natureof irreparabledamage hasbeenestablished tojustify theintervention of the Court atthis stage, an intervention that would, unavoidably,upsetthefunctioning of the Administration. 20 Inviewoftheaboveconclusion itisunnecessary todebatethesecondhurdlethattheapplicant mustinevitably overcomeinevery application for aprovisional order, namely,tomakeoutaseriousoranarguablecaseonthemerits. 25 The application isdismissed.Letthere benoorder astocosts. Applicationdismissed. No orderasto costs. 2117