Order — ECLI:EU:C:1997:394
Date: 1997-09-10
Language of the case: French
Court formation: President of the Chamber
Based on: Merger Treaty (1965)
Subject matter: Provisions governing the Institutions
Concepts: Application for interim measures: suspension of operation of the contested measure and other interim measures;Appeals
Procedure: Appeal - unfounded;Staff cases;Application for interim measures
Origin: Spain

Summary of the O r d e r 
1. Applications for interim measures — Suspension of operation — Provisional measures — Con­
ditions for granting — Prima fade case — Serious and irreparable harm — Power of assess­
ment of the judge hearing the application — Cumulative conditions — Consequences in the 
context of an appeal 
(EC Treaty, Arts 185 and 186; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 83(2); Rules of 
Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) 
2. Appeals — Pleas in law — Insufficient statement of reasons — Application as regards orders 
on applications for interim measures 
1. In the context of the overall examination 
of an application for suspension of the 
operation of an act or for other interim 
measures, the judge hearing the applica­
tion enjoys a broad discretion and is free 
to determine, having regard to the 
I - 4729 
SUMMARY — CASE C-248/97 P(R) 
particular circumstances of the case, the 
manner and order in which those various 
conditions are to be examined, there 
being no rule of Community law impos­
ing a pre-established scheme of analysis 
within which the need to order interim 
measures must be assessed. 
Consequently, in an appeal against an 
order dismissing an application for 
interim measures on the ground that 
there was no urgency for the measures 
sought, pleas which relate to the existence 
of a prima facie case but do not call into 
question the lack of urgency cannot form 
grounds for setting the order aside, even 
partially. 
2. The judge hearing an application for 
interim measures cannot be required to 
reply explicidy to all the points of fact 
and law raised in the course of the inter­
locutory proceedings. It is sufficient that 
the reasons given validly justify his order 
in the light of the circumstances of the 
case and enable the Court of Justice to 
exercise its powers of review. 
I - 4730