Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2016:358
Date: 2016-05-26
Language of the case: Spanish
Court formation: Third Chamber
Subject matter: Space;Research and technological development
Procedure: Action for annulment;Action for damages;Appeal - successful
Origin: Spain

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber), 26 May 2016 Appeal — Grounds — Inadequate or contradictory grounds — Admissibility — Scope of the obligation to state reasons — Scope of the Court’s review of judgments of the General Court (Art. 256 TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.) The statement of the reasons on which the judgment under appeal is based must clearly and unequivocally disclose the General Court’s thinking, so that the persons concerned can be apprised of the justification for the decision taken and the Court of Justice can exercise its power of review. However, the obligation to state reasons does not require the General Court to provide an account which follows exhaustively and one by one all the arguments put forward by the parties to the case and the reasoning may therefore be implicit, on condition that it enables the persons concerned to know why the General Court has not upheld their arguments and provides the Court of Justice with sufficient material for it to exercise its power of review. The question whether the grounds of a judgment of the General Court are contradictory or inadequate is a question of law which is amenable, as such, to review on appeal. (see paras 24-26)