CELEX: 61999TO0222
Language: en
Date: 1999-11-25 00:00:00
Title: Order of the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber) of 25 November 1999. # Jean-Claude Martinez and Charles de Gaulle v European Parliament. # Application for the adoption of interim measures - Measure of the Parliament interpreting a provision in its own Rules of Procedure - Political group - Admissibility - Prima facie case - Urgency - Balancing of interests. # Case T-222/99 R.

Avis juridique important

|

61999B0222

Order of the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber) of 25 November 1999.  -  Jean-Claude Martinez and Charles de Gaulle v European Parliament.  -  Application for the adoption of interim measures - Measure of the Parliament interpreting a provision in its own Rules of Procedure - Political group - Admissibility - Prima facie case - Urgency - Balancing of interests.  -  Case T-222/99 R.  

European Court reports 1999 Page II-03397

Summary
Keywords

1 Applications for interim measures - Conditions for admissibility - Admissibility of the main application - Irrelevant - Limits (Art. 242 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) 2 Actions for annulment - Actionable measures - Acts adopted by the European Parliament intended to produce legal effects outwith the Parliament itself (Art. 230 EC) 3 Applications for interim measures - Suspension of operation of a measure - Suspension of operation of an act adopted by the European Parliament concerning the interpretation of one of its Rules of Procedure - Certain Members prevented from belonging to a political group - Serious and irreparable damage - Balancing of all the interests at stake (Art. 242 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) 

Summary

1 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 that case.  Where, however, it is contended that the main application from which the application for interim measures is derived is manifestly inadmissible, it may prove necessary to establish the existence of certain factors which would justify the prima facie conclusion that the main application is admissible. 2 The first paragraph of Article 230 EC, which provides that the Court of Justice is to review, in particular, the legality of acts adopted by the European Parliament which are intended to produce legal effects vis-à-vis third parties,  is designed to subject to review by the Community judicature measures adopted by the Parliament in the context of the EC Treaty which might encroach on the powers of the Member States or of the other institutions, or exceed the limits which have been set to the Parliament's powers.  On the other hand, measures which relate only to the internal organisation of the work of the Parliament cannot be challenged in an action for annulment.  This category also includes acts of the European Parliament which either do not have legal effects or have legal effects only within the Parliament as regards the organisation of its work and are subject to review procedures laid down in its Rules of Procedure. 3 The purpose of proceedings for interim relief is to ensure that the judgment on the substance has full effect. In order to attain that objective the measures sought must be urgent in the sense that it is necessary, in order to avoid serious and irreparable damage to the interests of the applicant, that the measures should be ordered and should take effect before the judgment in the main proceedings. Serious damage is liable to be caused to Members of the European Parliament by the failure to suspend operation of a measure adopted by the Parliament concerning the interpretation of one of its rules of Procedure, where this prevents those Members from belonging to a political group, thus making it impossible for them to enjoy the rights and advantages conferred on political groups and thus unable to speak as representatives of the citizens of the Member States of the Community under the same conditions as Members who belong to a political group.  The damage is all the more serious because the time taken to investigate and dispose of the case in the main proceedings, time during which it cannot be ruled out that the applicants might suffer discrimination, may represent a not insignificant portion of their limited term of office.  Such damage is also irreparable in that even if the measure in question is annulled at the end of the main proceedings this will not remedy the situation. Moreover, suspension of the operation of that measure - in so far as it would have the effect of enabling the group in question to receive the same treatment as other mixed groups - could not adversely affect the organisation of the work of the European Parliament.