Order — ECLI:EU:C:1998:166
Date: 1998-04-15
Language of the case: Italian
Court formation: President of the Chamber
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Agriculture and Fisheries;External relations;Fruit and vegetables;Commercial policy;Bananas
Concepts: Application for interim measures: suspension of operation of the contested measure and other interim measures;Appeals
Procedure: Action for annulment;Appeal - unfounded;Appeal - inadmissible;Action for damages;Application for interim measures
Origin: Italy

Summary of the O r d e r 
1. Appeals — Pleas in law — Incorrect assessment of the facts — Inadmissibility — Application 
to appeals brought against an order on an application for interim measures 
(EC Treaty, Art. 168a; EC Statute of the Court of Justice, Arts 50, second para., and 51) 
2. Applications for interim measures — Provisional measures — Conditions f or granting — Seri-
ous and irreparable damage — Material circumstances of the applicant company — Assess­
ment in the light of the situation of the group to which it belongs 
(EC Treaty, Art. 186; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 83(2); Rules of Pro­
cedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) 
I -1815 
SUMMARY — CASE C-43/98 P(R) 
3. Applications for interim measures — Provisional measures — Conditions for granting — Seri­
ous and irreparable damage — Prima facie case — Dismissal of the application on the sole 
ground of lack of urgency — Consequences in the context of an appeal 
(EC Treaty, Art. 186; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 83(2); Rules of Pro­
cedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) 
4. Applications for interim measures — Provisional measures — Conditions for granting — 
Transition to the Community scheme in the banana sector — Measures sought to make good 
the refusal of the Commission to take transitional measures — Application of the general con­
ditions for granting 
(EC Treaty, Art. 186; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 83(4); Rules of Pro­
cedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2); Council Regulation No 404/93, Art. 30) 
1. Article 168a of the Treaty and Article 51 
of the Statute of the Court of Justice, 
under which an appeal may lie only on 
points of law and may not extend to any 
assessment of the facts, apply equally to 
appeals brought under the second para­
graph of Article 50 of the said Statute 
against decisions of the Court of First 
Instance on applications for interim relief. 
2. In order to assess the risk of serious and 
irreparable damage which it is claimed 
will result for an undertaking importing 
bananas from a Commission decision 
refusing to grant it additional import 
licences, the judge hearing the application 
for interim measures may assess the mate­
rial circumstances of the undertaking by 
taking into consideration inter alia the 
characteristics of the group to which the 
applicant is linked by way of its share­
holders. 
3. In the context of an appeal brought 
against an order dismissing an application 
for interim measures on the ground of 
lack of urgency of the measures sought, 
without any consideration of whether the 
main action appeared prima facie well 
founded, pleas which relate to the exist­
ence of a prima facie case but do not call 
into question the lack of urgency cannot 
form grounds for setting aside, even par­
tially, the order under appeal. 
4. When the judge hearing an application 
for interim measures to make good the 
refusal of the Commission to act pursu­
ant to Article 30 of Regulation N o 
404/93, relating to the transitional mea­
sures intended to assist transition to the . 
scheme established by the common 
organisation of the market in bananas, the 
conditions to which the adoption of the 
measures sought is subject do not differ 
from the general conditions for interim 
relief. 
I - 1816 
CAMAR v COMMISSION AND COUNCIL 
More specifically, while Article 30 of 
Regulation N o 404/93 permits, and, in 
certain circumstances, requires the Com­
mission to take definitive measures to 
regulate cases of unreasonable hardship, 
the judge hearing the application for 
interim measures in the context of a main 
application brought against the Commis­
sion for annulment or declaration of fail­
ure to act must adopt only the interim 
measures which appear necessary in order 
to avoid, pending the Court's decision on 
the substance, the applicant suffering seri­
ous and irreversible damage which could 
not be made good by a judgment in the 
main proceedings in favour of the appli­
cant. 
The judge hearing the application for 
interim measures will not therefore take 
the place of the Commission and apply 
Article 30 of Regulation N o 404/93, for 
that would lead him to do more than 
adopt only the measures necessary to 
ensure that the final decision subse­
quently to be given in the main action 
will be fully effective. 
I -1817