ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 354/40

Order of the General Court of 27 August 2015 — Squeeze Life v OHIM — Evolution Fresh (SQUEEZE LIFE)

(Case T-523/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Withdrawal of the application for registration - Correction of the decision concluding the proceedings before the Board of Appeal - No need to adjudicate))

(2015/C 354/48)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Squeeze Life, SL (Alicante, Spain) (represented by: J.-B. Devaureix and L. Montoya Terán, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: V. Melgar, Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Evolution Fresh, Inc. (San Bernardino, California, United States)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 14 April 2014 (Case R 595/2014-2) concerning opposition proceedings between Squeeze Life, SL and Evolution Fresh, Inc.

Operative part of the order

1. There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.

2. The Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) is to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Squeeze Life, SL.

(1) OJ C 329, 22.9.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 381/36

Order of the General Court of 14 September 2015 — Slovakia v Commission

(Case T-678/14) (1)

((Action for annulment - Own resources of the European Union - Financial responsibility of the Member States - Obligation to pay the Commission the amount corresponding to a loss of own resources - Letter from the Commission - Act not open to challenge - Inadmissibility))

(2015/C 381/41)

Language of the case: Slovak

Parties

Applicant: Slovak Republic (represented by: B. Ricziová, acting as Agent)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Grønfeldt, A. Tokár and M. Wasmeier, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action for the annulment of the alleged decision of the Directorate-General for Budget of the Commission, contained in letter BUDG/B/03MV D (2014) 2351197 of 15 July 2014, by which the Commission formally demanded the Slovak Republic to make funds available to the Commission for the gross amount of EUR 1 6 02 457,33 (of which 25 % should be deducted to cover expense incurred in collection) corresponding to a loss of traditional own resources, at the latest by the first working day following the 19th day of the second month after the letter was sent.

Operative part of the order

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action.

2. Holds that there is no need to rule on the applications for leave to intervene of the Federal Republic of Germany and Romania.

3. Orders the Slovak Republic to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.

4. Orders the Slovak Republic, the Commission, the Federal Republic of Germany and Romania each to bear their own costs relating to the applications for leave to intervene.

(1) OJ C 448, 15.12.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 381/29

Order of the General Court of 25 September 2015 — Kolarova v REA

(Case T-533/14 P) (1)

((Appeals - Civil service - Member of the contract staff - REA - Powers conferred on the authority authorised to conclude contracts of employment - Delegation to the Office for the Administration and Payment of Individual Entitlements (PMO) - Appeal directed against the delegating institution - Appeal clearly inadmissible in part and clearly unfounded in part))

(2015/C 381/31)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Desislava Kolarova (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: F. Frabetti, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: Research Executive Agency (REA) (represented by: S. Payan-Lagrou, acting as Agent, assisted by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

Appeal brought against the Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (Third Chamber) of 30 April 2014 in Kolarova v REA (Case F-88/13, ECR-SC, EU:F:2014:58), and seeking that that order be set aside.

Operative part of the order

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal.

2. Orders Mrs Desislava Kolarova to bear her own costs and pay those incurred by the Research Executive Agency (REA) on the appeal.

(1) OJ C 351, 6.10.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 27/75

Order of the General Court of 11 November 2015 — salesforce.com v OHIM (MARKETINGCLOUD)

(Case T-387/14) (1)

(2016/C 027/95)

Language of the case: English

The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 261, 11.8.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 398/77

Order of the General Court of 14 October 2015 — Montenegro v OHIM (Shape of a bottle)

(Case T-748/14) (1)

(2015/C 398/91)

Language of the case: English

The President of the Eighth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 7, 12.1.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 111/24

Order of the General Court of 1 February 2016 — SolarWorld and Others v Council

(Case T-142/14) (1)

((Actions for annulment - Subsidies - Imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (cells) originating in or consigned from China - Definitive countervailing duties - Exemption of imports covered by an accepted undertaking - Non-severability - Inadmissibility))

(2016/C 111/29)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: SolarWorld AG (Bonn, Germany); Brandoni solare SpA (Castelfidardo, Italy); and Solaria Energia y Medio Ambiente, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: L. Ruessmann, lawyer, and J. Beck, Solicitor)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: B. Driessen, acting as Agent)

Intervening parties in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: J.-F. Brakeland, T. Maxian Rusche and A. Stobiecka-Kuik, acting as Agents); Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Changshu), Inc. (Changshu, China); Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Luoyang), Inc. (Luoyang, China); Csi Cells Co. Ltd (Suzhou, China); Csi Solar Power (China), Inc. (Suzhou) (represented by: A. Willems, S. De Knop, lawyers, and K. Daly, Solicitor); and China Chamber of Commerce for Import and Export of Machinery and Electronic Products (Beijing, China) (represented by: J.-F. Bellis, F. Di Gianni and A. Scalini, lawyers)

Re:

Application for annulment of Article 2 of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1239/2013 of 2 December 2013 imposing a definitive countervailing duty on imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (i.e. cells) originating in or consigned from the People’s Republic of China (OJ 2013 L 325, p. 66).

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

2. Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Changshu), Inc., Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Luoyang), Inc., Csi Cells Co. Ltd and Csi Solar Power (China), Inc. shall be removed from Case T-142/14 as interveners.

3. SolarWorld AG, Brandoni solare SpA and Solaria Energia y Medio Ambiente, SA shall pay their own costs and those incurred by the Council of the European Union, including those relating to the application for interim measures.

4. The European Commission, Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Changshu), Inc., Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Luoyang), Inc., Csi Cells Co. Ltd, Csi Solar Power (China), Inc. and the China Chamber of Commerce for Import and Export of Machinery and Electronic Products shall pay their own costs.

(1) OJ C 142, 12.5.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 59/18

Order of the General Court of December 2015 — Italy v Commission

(Case T-673/14) (1)

((Action for annulment - State aid - Transport - Establishment of Airport Handling SpA - Decision to open the formal examination procedure provided for in Article 108(2) TFEU - Measure not open to challenge - Aid measures completely implemented by the date on which the action was brought - Inadmissibility))

(2016/C 059/19)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Italian Republic (represented by: G. Palmieri, acting as Agent, and S. Fiorentino and A. De Stefano, avvocati dello Stato)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Conte and S. Noë, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2014) 4537 final of 9 July 2014 to initiate a formal investigation procedure under Article 108(2) TFEU concerning the establishment of the company Airport Handling (State Aid SA.21420 (2014/C) (ex 20 14/NN) (ex 20 13/PN)).

Operative part of the order

1) The application is dismissed as inadmissible.

2) The Italian Republic is ordered to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 409, 17.11.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 121/29

Order of the General Court of 14 February 2017 — Helbrecht v EUIPO — Lenci Calzature (SportEyes)

(Case T-333/14) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Cancellation of the earlier figurative mark serving as a basis for the contested decision - No need to adjudicate))

(2017/C 121/42)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Andreas Helbrecht (Hilden, Germany) (represented by: C. König, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Rajh, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO intervening before the General Court: Lenci Calzature SpA (Turchetto-Montecarlo, Italy) (represented by: F. Celluprica and F. Fischetti, lawyers)

Re:

Action for annulment of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 February 2014 (Case R 830/2013-5), concerning opposition proceedings between Lenci Calzature and Mr Helbrecht.

Operative part of the order

1. There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.

2. Lenci Calzature SpA shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Mr Andreas Helbrecht. The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) shall bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 235, 21.7.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 335/45

Order of the General Court of 10 June 2016 — Pshonka v Council

(Case T-380/14) (1)

((Action for annulment - Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted in view of the situation in Ukraine - Freezing of funds - List of persons, entities and bodies covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources - Inclusion of the applicant’s name - Period allowed for commencing proceedings - Admissibility - Proof that inclusion on the list is justified - Manifestly well-founded action))

(2016/C 335/59)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Artem Viktorovych Pshonka (Moscow, Russia) (represented by: C. Constantina and J.-M. Reymond, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: V. Piessevaux and A. Vitro, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: S. Bartelt and D. Gauci, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Council Decision 2014/119/CFSP of 5 March 2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2014 L 66, p. 26) and of Council Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 of 5 March 2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2014 L 66, p. 1), in so far as they relate to the applicant.

Operative part of the order

1. Council Decision 2014/119/CFSP of 5 March 2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, and Council Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 of 5 March 2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine are annulled in so far as they relate to Mr Artem Viktorovych Pshonka.

2. The Council of the European Union shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Mr Pshonka.

3. The European Commission shall bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 261, 11.8.2014.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

APPLICATION FOR ANNULMENT - DEFINITION OF A DECISION - CRITERIA APPLICABLE IN THE LEGAL ASSESSMENT OF A MEASURE BY THE HIGH AUTHORITY - EFFECT OF DECLARATIONS ISSUED BY SERVANTS OF THE HIGH AUTHORITY - DISTINCTION BETWEEN A DECISION AND AN INTERNAL OFFICE DIRECTIVE

Summary

CF . SUMMARY, JUDGMENT IN CASE 20/58 OF 6 JULY 1959 :

( A ) THE LEGAL ASSESSMENT OF A MEASURE BY THE HIGH AUTHORITY DEPENDS ABOVE ALL ON ITS SUBJECT - MATTER AND ON ITS CONTENT .

( B ) WHEN THE HIGH AUTHORITY SENDS A LETTER TO AN AUXILIARY AGENCY ENTRUSTED BY IT WITH THE EXECUTION OF CERTAIN GENERAL PRINCIPLES AND IN PARTICULAR INSTRUCTING IT TO CONTINUE A CERTAIN PRACTICE FOLLOWED UP TILL THEN, THAT LETTER MAY CONSTITUTE A MERE INTERNAL OFFICE DIRECTIVE, EVEN IF IT WAS PUBLISHED IN THE JOURNAL OFFICIEL AND IF IT REFERS TO MEASURES WHICH THE AGENCY MUST TAKE IN REGARD TO UNDERTAKINGS IN THE COMMUNITY . IN ANY EVENT, THIS IS TRUE IF IT EMERGES FROM THE LETTER THAT THE HIGH AUTHORITY DID NOT INTEND TO TAKE A DECISION, BUT INTENDED MERELY TO CONFIRM PRINCIPLES WHICH IT BELIEVED, RIGHTLY OR WRONGLY, TO BE LOGICALLY TO INFER FROM ITS PREVIOUS DECISIONS .

THE FACT THAT A SERVANT OF THE HIGH AUTHORITY HAS DESCRIBED SUCH A LETTER TO A THIRD PARTY AS A " DECISION " DOES NOT INVALIDATE THE ABOVE STATEMENT

( TREATY ESTABLISHING THE ECSC, ARTICLE 33 ).

*/ 658J0020 /*.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . OFFICIALS OF THE ECSC - RESIGNATION - LEAVE ON PERSONAL GROUNDS - RIGHT TO RESIGN

( STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS OF THE ECSC, ARTICLE 41 )

2 . OFFICIALS OF THE ECSC - TRANSFER TO THE SERVICE OF ANOTHER EUROPEAN INSTITUTION - OPERATIONAL UNITY OF THE COMMUNITIES - ALLOWANCE ON TERMINATION OF SERVICE - ALLOWANCE ON ENTRY INTO SERVICE - NOT AGGREGABLE

( STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS OF THE ECSC, GENERAL STAFF REGULATIONS, ARTICLE 12 ( A ), ARTICLE 62 ( C ))

3 . OFFICIALS OF THE ECSC - ALLOWANCE ON TERMINATION OF SERVICE - ALLOWANCE ON ENTRY INTO SERVICE - CONCEPT

( STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS OF THE ECSC, GENERAL STAFF REGULATIONS, ARTICLE 12 ( A ), ARTICLE 62 ( C ))

4 . OFFICIALS OF THE ECSC - TERMINATION OF SERVICE - TRANSFER TO THE SERVICE OF ANOTHER EUROPEAN INSTITUTION - PROVIDENT FUND - COMPULSORY REIMBURSEMENT OF AMOUNTS PAID

( STAFF REGULATIONS OF OFFICIALS OF THE ECSC, GENERAL STAFF REGULATIONS, ARTICLE 12 ( A ) AND ( B ))

5 . OFFICIALS OF THE ECSC - OBLIGATION OF THE ADMINISTRATION - DELAYED EXECUTION - DEFAULT INTEREST - DEMAND WITHOUT JUSTIFICATION

Summary

1 . THE PLACING OF AN OFFICIAL OF THE ECSC ON LEAVE ON PERSONAL GROUNDS DOES NOT DEPRIVE HIM OF THE RIGHT, DURING THAT PERIOD, TO RESIGN WHEN HE WISHES ACCORDING TO THE RULES LAID DOWN IN ARTICLE 41 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS IF HIS RIGHT TO RESIGN HAS NOT BEEN EXPRESSLY EXCLUDED BY COMMON AGREEMENT WITH THE ADMINISTRATION .

2 . THE PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE VARIOUS ALLOWANCES AND GRANTS FOR INSTALLATION, DEPARTURE AND RESETTLEMENT MUST BE INTERPRETED IN THE LIGHT OF THE OPERATIONAL UNITY OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES AND ASSOCIATED INSTITUTIONS . THIS CONCEPT RENDERS INADMISSIBLE THE AGGREGATION OF A SEVERANCE GRANT FROM ONE INSTITUTION AND AN ALLOWANCE ON ENTRY INTO SERVICE FROM ANOTHER .

3 . THE ALLOWANCES ON TERMINATION OF SERVICE AND RESETTLEMENT ARE NOT IN THE NATURE OF A SUPPLEMENT TO THE REMUNERATION PAYABLE TO AN OFFICIAL BUT FORM THE EQUIVALENT, EVALUATED ON A FLAT-RATE BASIS IN ADVANCE, OF THE COSTS OF A SINGLE OPERATION, NAMELY THE TRANSFER OF THE OFFICIAL'S RESIDENCE FROM ONE PLACE TO ANOTHER .

4 . THE HIGH AUTHORITY CANNOT REFUSE TO PAY THE RESERVE FUNDS ESTABLISHED FOR THE BENEFIT OF AN OFFICIAL WHERE, AFTER RESIGNING, THE OFFICIAL ENTERS THE SERVICE OF ANOTHER EUROPEAN INSTITUTION . ONLY IN THE CASE OF AN AGREEMENT IMPLEMENTING THE UNIFICATION OR MERGER OF THE PROVIDENT AND PENSION FUNDS FOR THE WHOLE OF THE COMMUNITIES WILL IT BE POSSIBLE TO RECOGNIZE THE RIGHT OF THE HIGH AUTHORITY TO SAFEGUARD THE INTERESTS OF THE COMMON FUND .

5 . A DELAY IN THE PERFORMANCE BY THE ADMINISTRATION OF ONE OF ITS OBLIGATIONS DOES NOT, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY LEGAL PROVISION FOR DEFAULT INTEREST ( INTERETS MORATOIRES ) IN COMMUNITY LAW PERMIT THE PAYMENT OF SUCH INTEREST TO AN OFFICIAL .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

WRONGFUL ACT OR OMISSION - CERTIFICATES DRAWN UP BY A NATIONAL AUTHORITY RECOGNIZED AS SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS - WRONGFUL ACT COMMITTED BY A NATIONAL OFFICIAL IN DRAWING UP SUCH CERTIFICATES - ABSENCE OF CHECKING BY THE COMMUNITY .

Summary

( A ) IF, AT THE TIME WHEN CERTIFICATES OF ORIGIN, RECOGNIZED BY THE HIGH AUTHORITY AS SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS, ARE DRAWN UP, A WRONGFUL ACT IS COMMITTED BY A NATIONAL OFFICIAL WHO ACTS NEITHER IN ACCORDANCE WITH ORDERS GIVEN BY THE HIGH AUTHORITY NOR ON BEHALF OF OR IN THE NAME OF THAT INSTITUTION BUT IN THE PERFORMANCE OF PURELY NATIONAL DUTIES, THE WRONGFUL ACT CANNOT BE IMPUTED TO THE HIGH AUTHORITY AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A PERSONAL WRONG FOR WHICH THE LATTER IS LIABLE .

( B ) IF, INSTEAD OF MAKING ITSELF RESPONSIBLE FOR DRAWING UP THE CERTIFICATES, THE HIGH AUTHORITY LEAVES THIS TASK TO THE NATIONAL AUTHORITY, THERE IS NO DEFECTIVE ORGANIZATION AND, CONSEQUENTLY, NO WRONGFUL ACT OR OMISSION IN THE PERFORMANCE OF ITS FUNCTIONS WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 40 OF THE ECSC TREATY WHEN THE TASK IS ENTRUSTED TO A HIGHER AUTHORITY, SUCH AS A MINISTRY, WHICH APPEARS TO BE THE MOST APPROPRIATE AND THE MOST LIKELY TO AFFORD THE BEST GUARANTEE AGAINST ANY ABUSE AND WHEN THE NATIONAL REGULATIONS PROVIDE FOR AN EXTREMELY DETAILED PROCEDURE BEFORE THE SAID CERTIFICATES ARE DRAWN UP .

( C ) NOR, IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, DOES THE FACT THAT THE HIGH AUTHORITY REFRAINS FROM CHECKING THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE CERTIFICATES CONSTITUTE A WRONGFUL ACT OR OMISSION SO LONG AS THERE WAS NO INDICATION TO SUGGEST THE EXISTENCE OF AN ABUSE .

( ECSC TREATY, ARTICLE 40 )
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . PROCEDURE - ACTION FOR FAILURE TO ACT - ADMISSIBILITY - HIGH AUTHORITY'S DUTY TO ACT - FINDING REQUIRED

( ECSC TREATY, FIRST PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 35 )

2 . PROCEDURE - APPLICATIONS - PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS - REVIEW BY THE COURT OF ITS OWN MOTION

( PROTOCOL ON THE STATUTE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE ECSC, ARTICLE 22; RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE, ARTICLE 38 )

3 . PROCEDURE - APPLICATIONS - PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS - SUBMISSIONS RELIED UPON - TERMINOLOGY - SUMMARY - CONCEPT

( PROTOCOL ON THE STATUTE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE ECSC, ARTICLE 22; RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE, ARTICLE 38 )

4 . PROCEDURE - ACTION FOR DAMAGES - ADMISSIBILITY

( ECSC TREATY, ARTICLE 40 )

Summary

1 . THE ADMISSIBILITY OF AN ACTION FOR FAILURE TO ACT BASED ON THE FIRST PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 35 IS SUBJECT IN THE FIRST PLACE TO A FINDING THAT THE HIGH AUTHORITY HAD, UNDER A PROVISION OF THE TREATY OR OF RULES LAID DOWN FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION THEREOF, A DUTY TO TAKE A DECISION OR MAKE A RECOMMENDATION .

2 . THE COURT MUST OF ITS OWN MOTION CONSIDER WHETHER THE PROVISIONS GOVERNING THE FORM OF APPLICATIONS HAVE BEEN COMPLIED WITH SINCE THOSE PROVISIONS AFFECT NOT ONLY THE INTERESTS OF THE PARTIES BUT ALSO THE RIGHT OF THE COURT TO EXERCISE ITS POWER OF JUDICIAL REVIEW .

3 . THE WORDS 'BRIEF STATEMENT OF THE GROUNDS' USED IN THE PROTOCOL ON THE STATUTE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE AND THE RULES OF PROCEDURE MEAN THAT, ALTHOUGH THE APPLICATION NEED NOT CONFORM WITH THE PHRASEOLOGY OF THE FIRST PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 33, IT MUST SPECIFY THE NATURE OF THE GROUNDS ON WHICH THE APPLICATION IS BASED . ALTHOUGH A MERE ABSTRACT STATEMENT OF THE GROUNDS IN THE APPLICATION DOES NOT ALONE SATISFY THIS REQUIREMENT, THE GROUNDS MAY BE EXPRESSED IN TERMS OF THEIR SUBSTANCE RATHER THAN OF THEIR LEGAL CLASSIFICATION PROVIDED THAT THE GROUND OF COMPLAINT RELIED UPON IS ESTABLISHED IN RELATION TO THE FACTS WHICH HAVE BEEN SET OUT .

4 . WHEN BROUGHT AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO AN APPLICATION FOR ANNULMENT, AN APPLICATION FOR DAMAGES UNDER ARTICLE 40 OF THE ECSC TREATY IS ADMISSIBLE ONLY IF IT IS BASED ON GROUNDS WHICH ARE INDEPENDENT OF THOSE OF THE APPLICATION FOR ANNULMENT .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . PROCEEDINGS - ACTION FOR FAILURE TO ACT - SILENCE OF THE HIGH AUTHORITY ESSENTIAL - LETTER REPEATING AND EXPLAINING THIS POSITION - ABSENCE OF AN EXPRESS DECISION

2 . PROCEEDINGS - ACTION FOR FAILURE TO ACT - DECISIONS OF THE HIGH AUTHORITY REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 33 OF THE ECSC TREATY - INADMISSIBILITY

Summary

1 . A LETTER FROM THE HIGH AUTHORITY REPEATING AND EXPLAINING ITS PRIOR LEGAL POSITION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN EXPRESS DECISION OF REFUSAL BY IT AND CONSEQUENTLY DOES NOT INTERRUPT THE PERIOD AT THE END OF WHICH AN IMPLIED DECISION OF REFUSAL IS TO BE INFERRED FROM THE SILENCE OF THE HIGH AUTHORITY .

2 . AN APPLICANT CANNOT BE PERMITTED, BY USING THE PROCEDURAL ARTIFICE OF AN ACTION FOR FAILURE TO ACT, TO ASK FOR THE ANNULMENT OF A DECISION WHICH MIGHT HAVE BEEN DECLARED VOID IF PROCEEDINGS HAD BEEN INSTITUTED WITHIN THE TIME LIMIT LAID DOWN IN THE THIRD PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 33 .
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . ACTION FOR FAILURE TO ACT - CONCEPT OF FAILURE TO ACT - ADMISSIBILITY

( ECSC TREATY, ARTICLE 35 )

2 . ACTION FOR FAILURE TO ACT - ABSENCE OF FAILURE TO ACT AT THE TIME THE PROCEEDINGS ARE INSTITUTED - ABSENCE OF LEGAL INTEREST

( ECSC TREATY, ARTICLE 35 )

3 . INFORMATION - CHECKS - POWERS OF THE HIGH AUTHORITY - LIMITS

( ECSC TREATY, ARTICLE 47 )

4 . INFORMATION - CHECKS - CONTROL BY THE COURT OF MEASURES OF INVESTIGATION

5 . INFORMATION - CHECKS - INTERPRETATION BY REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 86, FOURTH PARAGRAPH, OF THE ECSC TREATY - SPECIAL PURPOSE OF THIS PROVISION

( ECSC TREATY, ARTICLES 47 AND 86 )

Summary

1 . AN ACTION UNDER ARTICLE 35 OF THE ECSC TREATY IS ADMISSIBLE ONLY IF THE HIGH AUTHORITY HAS TAKEN NO DECISION IN RELATION TO THE MATTER REFERRED TO IN THE NOTICES OF THE PARTIES CONCERNED .

2 . THERE IS NO LEGITIMATE GROUND FOR COMPLAINING OF A FAILURE TO ACT WHICH NO LONGER EXISTS AT THE TIME THE PROCEEDINGS ARE INSTITUTED . IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE LEGAL PROTECTION OF THE PARTIES CONCERNED IS SUFFICIENTLY ASSURED BY THE POSSIBILITY OF MAKING AN APPLICATION FOR ANNULMENT, UNDER ARTICLE 33 OF THE ECSC TREATY, OF THE DECISION OF THE HIGH AUTHORITY WHICH REACHES THEM BEFORE THE PROCEEDINGS ARE INSTITUTED .

3 . ARTICLE 47 OF THE ECSC TREATY CONFERRING ON THE HIGH AUTHORITY THE POWER TO 'OBTAIN THE INFORMATION IT REQUIRES' AND TO 'HAVE ANY NECESSARY CHECKS MADE' IS FORMULATED VERY WIDELY .

THE LIMIT OF THE HIGH AUTHORITY'S POWERS WHEN APPLYING THAT ARTICLE IS DETERMINED BY THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CHECKS .

4 . AS THERE IS NO EXPRESS RULE ON THIS MATTER IN COMMUNITY LAW, IT IS FOR THE COURT TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE MEASURES OF INVESTIGATION TAKEN BY THE HIGH AUTHORITY ARE EXCESSIVE .

5 . SEE PARAGRAPH 3 OF THE SUMMARY OF THE JUDGMENT IN CASE 31/59, REC . 1960, P . 72 . IN ORDER TO DEFINE THE GENERAL SCHEME AND THE EXACT SCOPE OF THE FIRST PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 47 THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO NEED TO RESORT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE FOURTH PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 86 OF THE TREATY, THE AIM OF WHICH IS IN NO WAY TO DEFINE THE EXTENT OF THE POWER TO OBTAIN INFORMATION AND TO MAKE CHECKS BUT SOLELY TO MAKE AVAILABLE TO THE HIGH AUTHORITY THE COMPULSORY POWERS AFFORDED BY NATIONAL REVENUE LAWS FOR THE DIRECT AND COMPULSORY POWERS AFFORDED BY NATIONAL REVENUE LAWS FOR THE DIRECT AND COMPULSORY EXECUTION BY ITS OWN OFFICIALS OF INSPECTIONS CAPABLE OF AFFECTING THE AREA OF INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY AND DEPARTING FROM THE PRINCIPLE OF THE INVIOLABILITY OF PRIVATE PREMISES .

*/ 659J0031 /*.