Order — ECLI:EU:C:2005:240
Date: 2005-04-19
Language of the case: English
Court formation: President of the Chamber
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Provisions governing the Institutions
Concepts: Application for interim measures: suspension of operation of the contested measure and other interim measures;Right to a judicial remedy
Procedure: Action for annulment;Appeal - unfounded;Action for damages;Application for interim measures
Origin: Belgium

Summary of the Order 1. Applications for interim measures — Conditions of admissibility — Assessment of whether the main application is prima facie admissible — Absence of case-law on the point — Not decisive (Arts 242 EC and 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(1)) 2. Community law — Principles — Right to effective judicial protection — Transmission to the national authorities of information obtained in an investigation carried out by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) — Discretion of the national authorities as to the action to be taken — Protection against criminal proceedings ensured at national level (Arts 10 EC and 234 EC; Parliament and Council Regulation No 1073/1999, Art. 10(2)) 1. The possibility of concluding, in proceedings for interim measures, that there are no grounds for considering that an application for annulment is prima facie admissible does not depend on the existence of Community case-law on the point or points of law raised in the main application. While the existence of such case-law may make it easier to reach such a conclusion, it is nevertheless the case that the manifest inadmissibility of an application may also follow from factors which have not or not yet been addressed in the Community case-law. (see para. 26) 2. Article 10(2) of Regulation No 1073/1999 concerning investigations conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) proceeds from the assumption that a measure such as the transmission to the national judicial authorities of information setting out the results of an internal investigation is not in itself capable of having adverse effect but may give rise, as the case may be, to administrative or criminal proceedings brought by the competent national authorities. The action taken by the national authorities in response to the information forwarded to them by OLAF is therefore, within the framework of Article 10 EC, within their sole and entire responsibility. It is thus for those authorities to ascertain themselves whether such information justifies or requires the bringing of criminal proceedings. Consequently, judicial protection against such proceedings must be ensured at national level with all the guarantees provided by national law, including those which follow from the fundamental rights that, as an integral part of the general principles of Community law, must also be observed by the Member States when they implement Community rules. In proceedings brought at national level, the court seised has the possibility, by means of a reference to the Court for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC, of putting questions to the Court, possibly at the instigation of the parties, on the interpretation of provisions of Community law which it considers necessary in order to give judgment. (see paras 32-33, 38-39)