ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Order of the Court (First Chamber) of 2 July 1987. - Jan Amesz and others v Commission of the European Communities. - Removal from the register. - Case 323/81.



European Court reports 1987 Page 02935



Parties

Grounds

Operative part



Parties

++++

IN CASE 323/81

1 . JAN AMESZ, RESIDING AT COQUIO ( VARESE ),

2 . ROLF BAUCH, RESIDING AT ANGERA ( VARESE ),

3 . JAKOB FLAMM, RESIDING AT RANCO ( VARESE ),

4 . HANS HOFFMANN, RESIDING AT TAINO ( VARESE ),

5 . HELMUT KNOEPPEL, RESIDING AT CADREZZATE ( VARESE ),

6 . HENRICUS NIJMAN, RESIDING AT VARESE,

7 . ANTON BIRKE, RESIDING AT TAINO ( VARESE ),

8 . HELMUT HENRICHS, RESIDING AT LEGGIUNO ( VARESE ),

9 . BERND WECKERMANN, RESIDING AT CADREZZATE ( VARESE ),

OFFICIALS OF THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, REPRESENTED BY BERND POTTHAST AND HANS JOSEF RUEBER, OF THE COLOGNE BAR, WITH AN ADDRESS FOR SERVICE IN LUXEMBOURG AT THE CHAMBERS OF VICTOR BIEL, 18 A RUE DES GLACIS,

APPLICANTS,

V

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, REPRESENTED BY JOERN PIPKORN, A MEMBER OF ITS LEGAL DEPARTMENT, ACTING AS AGENT, WITH AN ADDRESS FOR SERVICE IN LUXEMBOURG AT THE OFFICE OF G . KREMLIS, A MEMBER OF THE COMMISSION' S LEGAL DEPARTMENT, JEAN MONNET BUILDING, KIRCHBERG,

DEFENDANT,

APPLICATION FOR RELIEF IN THE TERMS SET OUT IN THE ORIGINATING APPLICATION,

THE COURT ( FIRST CHAMBER )

COMPOSED OF : F . SCHOCKWEILER, PRESIDENT OF CHAMBER, G . BOSCO AND R . JOLIET, JUDGES,

ADVOCATE GENERAL : G . F . MANCINI

REGISTRAR : P . HEIM

AFTER HEARING THE VIEWS OF THE ADVOCATE GENERAL,

MAKES THE FOLLOWING

ORDER

Grounds

BY LETTER LODGED AT THE COURT REGISTRY ON 15 JUNE 1987 THE APPLICANTS INFORMED THE COURT, IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 78 OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE, OF THEIR WISH TO DISCONTINUE THE PROCEEDINGS .

BY LETTER LODGED AT THE COURT REGISTRY ON 26 JUNE 1987 THE DEFENDANT TOOK FORMAL NOTE OF THE DISCONTINUANCE .

PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 69 ( 4 ) OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE IN CONJUNCTION WITH ARTICLE 70 THEREOF, IT IS APPROPRIATE TO ORDER THE PARTIES TO BEAR THEIR OWN COSTS .

Operative part

ON THOSE GROUNDS,

THE COURT ( FIRST CHAMBER )

HEREBY ORDERS AS FOLLOWS :

( 1 ) CASE 323/81 SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE REGISTER OF THE COURT;

( 2 ) THE PARTIES SHALL BEAR THEIR OWN COSTS .

LUXEMBOURG, 2 JULY 1987 .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 . APPLICATION FOR THE ADOPTION OF INTERIM MEASURES - SUSPENSION OF OPERATION - INTERIM MEASURES - CONDITIONS FOR GRANT

( EEC TREATY , ARTS 185 AND 186 ; RULES OF PROCEDURE , ART . 83 ( 2 ))

2 . COMPETITION - AGREEMENTS , DECISIONS OR CONCERTED PRACTICES - PROHIBITION - EXEMPTION - INDIVIDUAL EXEMPTION - CONDITIONS FOR GRANT - AMENDMENTS OF NOTIFIED AGREEMENT - SCOPE

( EEC TREATY , ART . 85 ( 3 ); REGULATION NO 17 OF THE COUNCIL , ART . 8 )

3 . COMPETITION - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE - TERMINATION OF INFRINGEMENTS - ADOPTION OF PROVISIONAL MEASURES - POWERS OF THE COMMISSION

( EEC TREATY , ART . 87 ; REGULATION NO 17 OF THE COUNCIL , ART . 3 )

Summary

1 . SUSPENSION OF THE OPERATION OF A DECISION AND THE OTHER INTERIM MEASURES WHICH THE COURT OF JUSTICE MAY ORDER IN PURSUANCE OF ARTICLES 185 AND 186 OF THE TREATY MAY ONLY BE CONSIDERED IF THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF FACT AND LAW RELIED UPON FOR THE PURPOSE OF OBTAINING THEM PRIMA FACIE JUSTIFY THE GRANTING OF THEM . IN ADDITION THEY MUST BE URGENTLY REQUIRED , INASMUCH AS , IN ORDER TO PREVENT THE PARTY APPLYING FOR THEM FROM SUFFERING GRAVE AND IRREPARABLE HARM , IT IS NECESSARY THAT THEY BE ADOPTED AND PUT INTO EFFECT BEFORE THE COURT ' S DECISION ON THE SUBSTANCE OF THE CASE . FINALLY , THEY MUST BE PROVISIONAL , SO AS TO BE WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THAT DECISION .

2.THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT THE COMMISSION HAS AUTHORITY , WHEN REQUIRED TO DECIDE UPON AN APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION UNDER ARTICLE 85 ( 3 ) OF THE TREATY , TO MAKE SUCH EXEMPTION SUBJECT TO CERTAIN CONDITIONS AND TO REQUIRE AMENDMENTS TO BE MADE TO THE AGREEMENT NOTIFIED . THOSE AMENDMENTS MAY BE DESIGNED NOT ONLY TO REMOVE CERTAIN CLAUSES BUT ALSO TO SUPPLEMENT OR EXTEND THE SCOPE OF THE AGREEMENT IN QUESTION .

3.THE COMMISSION MUST BE ABLE , WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF THE SUPERVISORY TASK CONFERRED UPON IT IN COMPETITION MATTERS BY THE TREATY AND REGULATION NO 17 , TO TAKE PROTECTIVE MEASURES TO THE EXTENT TO WHICH THEY APPEAR INDISPENSABLE IN ORDER TO PREVENT ITS SUBSEQUENT DECISION FROM BECOMING INEFFECTIVE . IT IS NEVERTHELESS NECESSARY FOR THOSE INTERIM MEASURES TO BE TAKEN ONLY IN CASES OF PROVEN URGENCY , IN ORDER TO PREVENT THE OCCURRENCE OF A SITUATION LIKELY TO CAUSE GRAVE AND IRREPARABLE HARM TO THE PARTY APPLYING FOR THEIR ADOPTION OR INTOLERABLE DAMAGE TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST . THE MEASURES MUST BE OF A TEMPORARY AND CONSERVATORY NATURE AND MUST BE LIMITED TO WHAT IS NECESSARY IN THE GIVEN SITUATION .
Keywords



Keywords

APPLICATION FOR THE ADOPTION OF INTERIM MEASURES - SUSPENSION OF OPERATION - CONDITIONS FOR GRANTING

( RULES OF PROCEDURE , ART . 83 ( 2 ))
Keywords



Keywords

++++

PROCEDURE - NO NEED TO GIVE A DECISION - COSTS - TAXATION - FACTORS TO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION

( RULES OF PROCEDURE, ARTS 69 ( 5 ), 73 ( B ) AND 76 ( 5 ) )
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

PROCEEDINGS FOR THE ADOPTION OF INTERIM MEASURES - SUSPENSION OF OPERATION - INTERIM MEASURES - CONDITIONS FOR GRANT THEREOF

( EEC TREATY , ARTS . 185 AND 186 ; RULES OF PROCEDURE , ART . 83 ( 2 ))

Summary

SUSPENSION OF OPERATION AND THE OTHER INTERIM MEASURES WHICH MAY BE PRESCRIBED BY THE COURT PURSUANT TO ARTICLES 185 AND 186 OF THE EEC TREATY CANNOT BE CONSIDERED UNLESS THE FACTUAL AND LEGAL CIRCUMSTANCES RELIED UPON TO OBTAIN THEM ESTABLISH A PRIMA FACIE CASE FOR GRANTING THEM . IN ADDITION THERE MUST BE URGENCY IN THE SENSE THAT IT IS NECESSARY FOR THE MEASURES TO BE ISSUED AND TO TAKE EFFECT BEFORE THE DECISION OF THE COURT ON THE SUBSTANCE OF THE CASE IN ORDER TO AVOID SERIOUS AND IRREPARABLE DAMAGE TO THE PARTY SEEKING THEM . FINALLY , THEY MUST BE PROVISIONAL IN THE SENSE THAT THEY DO NOT PREJUDGE THE DECISION ON THE SUBSTANCE OF THE CASE .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

APPLICATION FOR A DECLARATION THAT A MEASURE IS VOID - MEASURES IN RESPECT OF WHICH AN ACTION MAY BE BROUGHT - ACTS BRINGING ABOUT A CHANGE IN THE APPLICANT ' S LEGAL POSITION

( ART . 173 OF THE EEC TREATY )

Summary

ONLY A MEASURE WHOSE LEGAL EFFECTS ARE BINDING ON THE APPLICANT AND ARE CAPABLE OF AFFECTING HIS INTERESTS BY BRINGING ABOUT A DISTINCT CHANGE IN HIS LEGAL POSITION IN AN ACT OR DECISION WHICH MAY BE THE SUBJECT OF AN ACTION UNDER ARTICLE 173 FOR A DECLARATION THAT IT IS VOID .
Keywords



Keywords

PROCEDURE - INDICATION OF AN ADDRESS FOR SERVICE IN THE PLACE WHERE THE COURT HAS ITS SEAT - ABSENCE - REQUEST TO PUT THE APPLICATION IN ORDER NOT COMPLIED WITH - APPLICATION INADMISSIBLE

( RULES OF PROCEDURE , ART . 38 ( 2 ) AND ( 7 ))
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

PRELIMINARY RULINGS - REFERENCE TO THE COURT - NATIONAL COURT OR TRIBUNAL WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY - CONCEPT

( EEC TREATY , ART . 177 )

Summary

ACCORDING TO ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY , A REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING MAY BE SUBMITTED TO THE COURT OF JUSTICE ONLY BY A COURT OR TRIBUNAL OF A MEMBER STATE WHICH IS REQUIRED TO GIVE A RULING IN PROCEEDINGS WHICH ARE INTENDED TO RESULT IN A JUDICIAL DECISION . THAT IS NOT THE POSITION IN THE CASE OF A CONSULTATIVE COMMISSION FOR CURRENCY OFFENCES WHOSE TASK IS TO SUBMIT AN OPINION WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE AND NOT TO RESOLVE DISPUTES .
Keywords



Keywords

APPLICATION FOR THE ADOPTION OF INTERIM MEASURES - SUSPENSION OF THE OPERATION OF A MEASURE - INTERIM MEASURES - CONDITIONS FOR GRANTING - IRREPARABLE DAMAGE - NONE , OWING TO COMMITMENTS ENTERED INTO BEFORE THE COURT

( EEC TREATY , ARTS 185 AND 186 ; RULES OF PROCEDURE , ART . 83 ( 2 ))
Keywords



Keywords

++++

Procedure - Costs - Rectification of the judgment

(Rules of Procedure of the Court, Arts 66 and 67)
Keywords



Keywords

APPLICATION FOR THE ADOPTION OF AN INTERIM MEASURE - SUSPENSION OF OPERATION OF A DECISION - CONDITIONS FOR GRANTING - SERIOUS AND IRREPARABLE DAMAGE

( EEC TREATY , ART . 185 ; RULES OF PROCEDURE , ART . 83 ( 2 ))
Keywords



Keywords

APPLICATION FOR INTERIM MEASURES - SUSPENSION OF OPERATION OF A MEASURE - INTERIM MEASURES - CONDITIONS FOR THEIR ADOPTION

( RULES OF PROCEDURE , ART . 83 ( 2 ))
Keywords



Keywords

1 . APPLICATION FOR THE ADOPTION OF AN INTERIM MEASURE - SUSPENSION OF OPERATION OF A DECISION - CONDITIONS FOR GRANTING - SERIOUS AND IRREPARABLE DAMAGE

( EEC TREATY , ART . 185 ; RULES OF PROCEDURE , ART . 83 ( 2 ))

2 . APPLICATION FOR THE ADOPTION OF AN INTERIM MEASURE - CONDITIONS FOR ADMISSIBILITY - ADMISSIBILITY OF THE MAIN APPLICATION - IRRELEVANT

( EEC TREATY , ARTS 185 AND 186 ; RULES OF PROCEDURE , ART . 83 ( 1 ))
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Procedure - Third-party proceedings - Judgment given in proceedings against a Member State for failure to fulfil its obligations - Natural or legal persons - Inadmissibility

( Protocol on the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Communities, Arts 37 and 39; Rules of Procedure, Art . 97 )

Summary

Natural or legal persons other than the Member States and the Community institutions have no capacity to make an application originating third-party proceedings against a judgment of the Court given in proceedings for a declaration that a Member State has failed to fulfil its obligations .

In the first place, such persons do not fulfil the condition laid down by Article 39 of the Protocol on the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Comminities which restricts third-party proceedings solely to persons who could, as Article 97 of the Rules of Procedure specifies, have taken part in the case, since they are prevented by Article 37 of the aforesaid protocol from intervening in the proceedings for a declaration that a Member State has failed to fulfil its obligations, and secondly, it would be paradoxical, in view of the purpose of third-party proceedings and their role in contentious proceedings, if persons who are prohibited from intervening in a case were able, by those procedural means, to call in question the judgment given in that case .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

ACTION FOR A DECLARATION THAT A MEASURE IS VOID - NATURAL AND LEGAL PERSONS - MEASURES OF DIRECT AND INDIVIDUAL CONCERN TO THEM - REGULATION LAYING DOWN DETAILED RULES FOR THE APPLICATION OF THE CO-RESPONSIBILITY LEVY IN THE CEREALS SECTOR

( EEC TREATY, SECOND PARAGRAPH OF ART . 173 AND ART . 189; COMMISSION REGULATION NO 2040/86 )

Summary

REGULATION NO 2040/86 LAYING DOWN DETAILED RULES FOR THE APPLICATION OF THE CO-RESPONSIBILITY LEVY IN THE CEREALS SECTOR DETERMINES THE OPERATIONS IN RESPECT OF WHICH THE LEVY IS PAYABLE, SUBJECT TO EXEMPTED OPERATIONS, AND LAYS DOWN RULES FOR DETERMINING THE QUANTITIES WHICH ARE SUBJECT TO THE LEVY AND DETAILED RULES CONCERNING THE COLLECTION AND PASSING ON OF THE LEVY . ALL THESE MATTERS ARE DEFINED IN ABSTRACT AND GENERAL TERMS ON THE BASIS OF OBJECTIVE CRITERIA RELATING SOLELY TO THE NATURE OF THE PRODUCTS AND THE WAY IN WHICH THEY ARE PROCESSED, THE IDENTITY OF THE PERSONS WHO CARRY OUT THE OPERATION IN QUESTION BEING IRRELEVANT .

IT FOLLOWS THAT THE REGULATION DOES NOT CONCERN A CLOSED CIRCLE OF PERSONS WHO ARE DETERMINED AT THE TIME OF ITS ADOPTION BUT CONSTITUTES A MEASURE OF GENERAL APPLICATION WHICH APPLIES TO OBJECTIVELY DETERMINED SITUATIONS AND PRODUCES LEGAL EFFECTS WITH REGARD TO CATEGORIES OF PERSONS DESCRIBED IN A GENERALIZED AND ABSTRACT MANNER . IT CANNOT THEREFORE BE REGARDED AS A DECISION OR AS A SERIES OF DECISIONS WHICH, ALTHOUGH ADOPTED IN THE FORM OF A REGULATION, IS OF DIRECT AND INDIVIDUAL CONCERN TO FARMERS WHO USE INDUSTRIAL COMPOUND FEEDINGSTUFFS MADE FROM CEREALS OR TO INDUSTRIAL AND COOPERATIVE UNDERTAKINGS WHICH PROCESS CEREALS INTO CATTLE FEED .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

APPLICATION FOR INTERIM MEASURES - SUSPENSION OF OPERATION OF A DECISION - CONDITIONS FOR GRANTING - SERIOUS AND IRREPARABLE DAMAGE

( EEC TREATY, ART . 185; RULES OF PROCEDURE, ART . 83 ( 2 ) )

Summary

IN SUPPORT OF AN APPLICATION FOR THE SUSPENSION OF THE OPERATION OF A DECISION, IT IS NOT SUFFICIENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF SATISFYING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE 83 ( 2 ) OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE TO ALLEGE MERELY THAT THE MEASURE THE SUSPENSION OF WHOSE OPERATION IS BEING SOUGHT IS ABOUT TO BE PUT INTO EFFECT BUT IT IS ALSO NECESSARY TO PUT FORWARD CIRCUMSTANCES OF SUCH A NATURE AS TO ESTABLISH A CASE OF URGENCY AND CAPABLE OF SHOWING THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF AN ORDER SUSPENDING THE OPERATION OF THE MEASURE SERIOUS AND IRREPARABLE DAMAGE WOULD BE CAUSED TO THE PARTY APPLYING FOR THE ORDER .
Keywords



Keywords

++++

APPLICATION FOR INTERIM MEASURES - SUSPENSION OF THE OPERATION OF A MEASURE - INTERIM MEASURES - CONDITIONS FOR GRANTING - SERIOUS DAMAGE WHICH WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO REPAIR

( RULES OF PROCEDURE, ART . 83 ( 2 )*)
Keywords



Keywords

++++

Action for damages - Procedure - Abandonment of the proceedings by the parties - Removal from the register

( EEC Treaty, Art . 178; Rules of Procedure, Art . 77 )
Keywords



Keywords

++++

Application for interim measures - Interim measures - Conditions for granting - Measures not prejudging the decision on the substance of the case

( Rules of Procedure, Art . 83 ( 2 ) )
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Application for interim measures - Conditions of admissibility - Admissibility of the main application - Irrelevance - Limits

( EEC Treaty, Arts 185 and 186; Rules of Procedure, Art . 83 ( 1 ) )

Summary

Although in principle the issue of the admissibility of the main application should not be examined in proceedings relating to an application for interim measures, so as not to prejudge the substance of the case, it nevertheless seems necessary, when it is contended that the main application to which the application for interim measures relates is manifestly inadmissible, to establish whether there are any grounds for concluding prima facie that the main application is admissible .

Such an approach is all the more necessary in a case where the applicant is a private party seeking a declaration that a measure of general application is void, in order to prevent a situation where that person is able, by means of an application for interim measures, to obtain the suspension of the operation of a measure which the Court subsequently refuses to declare void because his application is inadmissible .
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Procedure

–

Interpretation of a judgment

–

Application for interpretation of a preliminary ruling

–

Inadmissibility (Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 43; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 92(1)) (see points 3-4

)

Subject of the case

Re:

Application for interpretation of the judgment of the Court of Justice of 17 May 1990 in Case C‑262/88 Barber .

Operative part

Operative part

1. The application for interpretation is dismissed.

2. Mr Peinado Guitart is ordered to pay his own costs.
Keywords



Keywords

++++

Application for interim measures - Suspension of operation of a measure - Prima facie case - Serious and irreparable damage - Need to weigh up all the interests involved

( EEC Treaty, Art . 185; Rules of Procedure, Art . 83(2 ) )
Keywords

Operative part



Keywords

++++

Interim measures - Suspension of a measure - Application deprived of its purpose by defendant' s decision not to implement the measure at issue - Ruling unnecessary

( EEC Treaty, Art . 185 )

Operative part

( 1 ) It is not necessary to give a ruling .

( 2 ) Costs are reserved .
Keywords



Keywords

++++

Application for interim measures - Suspension of operation - Interim measures - Conditions for granting - Prima facie case - Appropriateness of the measures applied for

( EEC Treaty, Arts . 185 and 186; Rules of Procedure, Art . 83 ( 2 ))
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Application for interim relief - Suspension of operation of a measure - Interim measures - Conditions for granting - Serious and irreparable damage suffered by the applicant

(EEC Treaty, Arts 185 and 186; Rules of Procedure, Art. 83(2) )

Summary

The urgency required under Article 83(2) of the Rules of Procedure for an order to be made suspending the operation of a decision or adopting other interim measures must be assessed in relation to the necessity for an order granting interim relief in order to prevent serious and irreparable damage to the party requesting the interim measures. That party must therefore furnish proof that he cannot await the conclusion of the main action without personally suffering damage which would have serious and irreparable effects for him.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Actions for annulment of measures - Natural or legal persons - Measures of direct and individual concern to them - Regulation opening an invitation to tender for the sale for export of baled tobacco held by the intervention agencies and subsequent notice of invitation to tender

(EEC Treaty, Art. 173, second para.; Commission Regulation No 2436/91)

Summary

Regulation No 2436/91 opening an invitation to tender for the sale for export of baled tobacco held by the intervention agencies, and a notice of invitation to tender published pursuant thereto, which lay down the principle and conditions of that tender procedure, are of concern to potential tenderers only in their general capacity as economic operators in the tobacco trade, in the same way as any operator in an identical situation, and are not of individual concern to them within the meaning of the second paragraph of Article 173 of the EEC Treaty, irrespective of the possibility of determining more or less precisely the numbers or even the identity of the operators to whom they apply.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Actions for annulment of measures ° Natural or legal persons ° Measures of direct and individual concern to them ° Provision suspending the application to Gibraltar airport of the regulation on the operation of air cargo services between Member States ° Inadmissible

(EEC Treaty, Art. 173, second para.; Council Regulation No 294/91, Art. 1(3))

Summary

Article 1(3) of Regulation No 294/91 on the operation of air cargo services between Member States, which suspends the application of that regulation to Gibraltar airport until the cooperation arrangements agreed between the Kingdom of Spain and the United Kingdom in respect of that airport come into operation, cannot be regarded as constituting a decision within the meaning of the second paragraph of Article 173 of the Treaty, so that an action for its annulment brought by a natural or legal person is inadmissible.

Where an instrument contains limitations or derogations which are temporary or territorial in nature, they form an integral part of the provisions as a whole within which they are found and, in the absence of any misuse of powers, are of the same general nature as those provisions. The suspension by the article in issue of the application of the regulation, which is itself general in scope, affects equally all air carriers wishing to operate an air cargo service between another Community airport and Gibraltar airport and, more generally, all those using the latter airport. Furthermore, it merely reflects the existence of an obstacle of an objective nature to the immediate application of the regulation to Gibraltar airport, arising from differences between two Member States.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Procedure ° Division of jurisdiction between the Court of Justice and the Court of First Instance ° Action brought before the Court of Justice by a natural or legal person on the basis of the third paragraph of Article 175 of the Treaty and concerning the implementation of the competition rules applicable to undertakings ° Competition rules applicable to undertakings ° Definition ° Referral to the Court of First Instance

(EEC Treaty, Art. 90; Council Decision 88/591, Art. 3(1)(c); EEC Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 47, second para.)

Summary

An action brought by a natural or legal person pursuant to the third paragraph of Article 175 of the EEC Treaty and concerning the implementation of Article 90 of the Treaty falls, pursuant to Article 3(1)(c) of Council Decision 88/591 establishing the Court of First Instance, within the jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance. Although Article 90(1) and the general rules which the Commission may lay down pursuant to Article 90(3) specify the obligations of the Member States, those provisions concern the implementation of the competition rules applicable to undertakings inasmuch as they prohibit the enactment or maintenance in force of State legislation which could affect the application of those rules to undertakings enjoying a particular status.

Where such an action is brought before it, the Court of Justice must, by virtue of the second paragraph of Article 47 of its Statute, refer that action to the Court of First Instance.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

Applications for interim measures ° Conditions of admissibility ° Main action dismissed as inadmissible

(EEC Treaty, Arts 185 and 186; Rules of Procedure of the Court, Art. 83(1))

Summary

The dismissal on the ground of inadmissibility of the main action to which an application for interim relief relates renders that application itself inadmissible.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1. Officials - Pensions - Invalidity pension - Calculation - Minimum amount

(Staff Regulations, Art. 78)

2. Appeal - Operative part of judgment justified by ground stated ex abundanti cautela - Dismissal

Summary

1. The fifth paragraph of Article 78 of the Staff Regulations specifies a minimum amount of invalidity pension which depends solely on the minimum subsistence figure. That method is independent of the method for determining the minimum amount of the retirement pension which, by virtue of the fourth paragraph Article 77 of the Staff Regulations, depends on the official' s years of service.

It appears from the wording and from the general scheme of Articles 77 and 78 that the latter refers to the former solely for the purpose of determining the rate of the invalidity pension, to the exclusion of the basis for calculation and its minimum amount.

2. Where, in the course of an appeal, the Court of Justice, upon examining one of the grounds of appeal put forward by the applicant, finds that one of the grounds of the contested judgment, although stated ex abundanti cautela, is sufficient to justify it, it is not necessary for the Court of Justice to examine the other grounds of appeal.