Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Applications for interim measures — Suspension of operation of a measure — Interim measures — Conditions for granting — Prima facie case — Urgency — Cumulative nature — Balancing of all the interests involved — (Arts 242 EC and 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2))

2. Applications for interim measures — Conditions for admissibility — Admissibility of the main action — Not relevant — Limits — (Arts 242 EC and 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(1))

3. Applications for interim measures — Suspension of operation of a measure — Conditions for granting — Admissibility of the main action — Jurisdiction of the court hearing the application for interim measures — Creation by Article 229 EC of an independent legal remedy — Not included — (Arts 229 EC and 242 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2))

4. Applications for interim measures — Suspension of operation of a measure — Exemption from the obligation to provide a bank guarantee as a condition for the fine not being recovered immediately — Conditions for granting — Exceptional circumstances — (Art. 242 EC)

Summary

1. Under Article 104(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, an application for interim measures must state the circumstances giving rise to urgency and the pleas of fact and law establishing a prima facie case for the interim measures applied for. Those conditions are cumulative, so that an application for interim measures must be dismissed if any one of them is absent. Where appropriate, the judge hearing such an application must also weigh up the interests involved.

see para. 14

2. In principle the issue of the admissibility of the main action should not be examined in relation to an application for interim measures so as not to prejudge the substance of the case. Nevertheless, where it is contended that the main action to which the application for interim measures relates is manifestly inadmissible, it may prove necessary to establish whether there are any grounds for concluding prima facie that the main action is admissible.

see para. 19

3. The question whether Article 229 EC establishes an independent legal remedy or relates only to the scope of judicial review carried out in the context of an action, such as an action for annulment referred to in Article 230 EC, constitutes a question of principle which it is not for the court hearing the application for interim measures to rule on.

see paras 25-26

4. An application for an exemption from the obligation to provide a bank guarantee as a condition for the fine not being recovered immediately will only be granted in exceptional circumstances. The possibility of requiring the provision of a financial guarantee is expressly provided for with regard to applications for interim relief by the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice and of the Court of First Instance and is a general and reasonable way for the Commission to act.

The existence of such exceptional circumstances may, in principle, be regarded as established where the party seeking exemption from providing the requisite bank guarantee adduces evidence that it is objectively impossible for it to provide such guarantee or where such provision would imperil its existence.

see paras 30-31