Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Appeals — Pleas in law — Mere repetition of the pleas in law and arguments submitted to the Court of First Instance — Failure to identify the error of law relied on — Inadmissibility — (Art. 225 EC; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the Court, Art. 112(1)(c))

2. Parliament — Competences — Application and interpretation of the Rules of Procedure — (Rules of Procedure of the Parliament, Rule 180)

3. Appeals — Pleas in law — Incorrect assessment of the facts — Inadmissible — Review by the Court of Justice of the assessment of facts and evidence by the Court of First Instance — Excluded unless the sense of evidence has been distorted — (Art. 225 EC; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.)

4. Appeals — Pleas in law — Plea put forward for the first time in the appeal — Inadmissible — (Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58)

Summary

1. Provided that an appellant challenges the interpretation or application of Community law by the Court of First Instance, the points of law examined at first instance may be discussed again in the course of an appeal. Indeed, if an appellant could not thus base his appeal on pleas in law and arguments already relied on before the Court of First Instance, an appeal would be deprived of part of its purpose. However, it is clear from the first paragraph of Article 225 EC, from the first paragraph of Article 58 of the Statute of the Court of Justice and from Article 112(1)(c) of its Rules of Procedure that an appeal must indicate precisely the contested elements of the judgment which the appellant seeks to have set aside, and also the legal arguments specifically advanced in support of the appeal. Consequently, where the appellant puts forwards a plea in law without indicating the reasons for which he considers that the Court of First Instance had erred in law by rejecting the arguments which he put forward at first instance, but merely reproduces those arguments, such a plea must be rejected as manifestly inadmissible.

see paras 39-42

2. It is clear from a reading of Rule 180 that the Parliament has competence to ensure, if need be by referring a matter to the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, that its Rules of Procedure are being correctly applied and interpreted.

see paras 45-48

3. It is clear from Article 225 EC and Article 58 of the Statute of the Court of Justice that an appeal is limited to points of law. The Court of First Instance thus has exclusive jurisdiction to establish and assess the relevant facts and to assess the value which should be attached to the items of evidence produced to it, unless there has been distortion of such facts or evidence.

see para. 53

4. To allow a party to put forward for the first time before the Court of Justice a plea in law which he has not raised before the Court of First Instance would mean allowing that party to bring before the Court, whose jurisdiction in appeals is limited, a wider case than that heard by the Court of First Instance. In an appeal, the Court ' s jurisdiction is confined to examining the assessment by the Court of First Instance of the pleas argued before it.

see para. 76