Order — ECLI:EU:T:2002:196
Date: 2002-07-12
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community (1951)
Subject matter: External relations;Commercial policy;Protective measures;Steel industry;ECSC matters
Concepts: Application for interim measures: suspension of operation of the contested measure and other interim measures
Procedure: Action for annulment;Application for interim measures - unfounded;Action for damages
Origin: Germany

Summary of the Order 
1. Applications for interim measures — Conditions for admissibility — Admissibility of 
the main action — Irrelevant — Limits 
(Arts 242 EC and 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, 
Art. 104(1» 
2. Applications for interim measures — Suspension of operation of a measure — 
Interim relief — Conditions for granting — Serious and irreparable damage — 
Standard of proof — Pecuniary loss — Loss of customers — Situation liable to 
endanger the existence of the applicant company 
(Arts 242 EC and 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, 
Art. 104(2» 
II-3219 
SUMMARY — CASE T-163/02 R 
1. In principle the issue of the admissibil­
ity of the main action should not be 
examined in relation to an application 
for interim measures so as not to 
prejudge the substance of the case. 
Nevertheless, where it is contended 
that the main action to which the 
application for interim measures relates 
is manifestly inadmissible, it may prove 
necessary to establish whether there are 
any grounds for concluding prima facie 
that the main action is admissible. 
(see para. 21) 
2. The urgency of an application for 
interim measures must be assessed in 
relation to the necessity for an interim 
order to prevent serious and irrepar­
able damage to the party applying for 
those measures. It is for the party in 
question to prove that it cannot wait 
for the outcome of the main proceed­
ings without suffering such damage. 
Although in order to establish the 
existence of serious and irreparable 
damage it is not necessary for the 
occurrence of the damage to be demon­
strated with absolute certainty, it being 
sufficient to show that damage is fore­
seeable with a sufficient degree of 
probability, the applicants are none 
the less required to prove the facts 
forming the basis of their claim that 
serious and irreparable damage is 
likely. 
Pecuniary loss, which a loss of cus­
tomers is because it consists in a loss of 
earnings, cannot, save in exceptional 
circumstances, be regarded as irrepar­
able or even as being reparable only 
with difficulty, if it can ultimately be 
the subject of financial compensation. 
Pursuant to those principles, suspen­
sion of the operation of a measure 
would be justified only if it appeared 
that, without suspension, the appli­
cants would be in a situation capable 
of threatening their very existence or of 
altering their market shares irretriev­
ably. 
(see paras 28-31) 
II - 3220