This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 61996TO0179(01)
Order of the President of the Court of First Instance of 21 March 1997. # J. Antonissen v Commission of the European Communities and Council of the European Union. # Milk quotas - Action based on non-contractual liability of the Community - Interim relief - Payment of part of the compensation sought by way of advance - Conditions - Not fulfilled. # Case T-179/96 R.
Order of the President of the Court of First Instance of 21 March 1997.
J. Antonissen v Commission of the European Communities and Council of the European Union.
Milk quotas - Action based on non-contractual liability of the Community - Interim relief - Payment of part of the compensation sought by way of advance - Conditions - Not fulfilled.
Case T-179/96 R.
Order of the President of the Court of First Instance of 21 March 1997.
J. Antonissen v Commission of the European Communities and Council of the European Union.
Milk quotas - Action based on non-contractual liability of the Community - Interim relief - Payment of part of the compensation sought by way of advance - Conditions - Not fulfilled.
Case T-179/96 R.
European Court Reports 1997 II-00425
ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:1997:45
61996B0179(01)
Order of the President of the Court of First Instance of 21 March 1997. - J. Antonissen v Commission of the European Communities and Council of the European Union. - Milk quotas - Action based on non-contractual liability of the Community - Interim relief - Payment of part of the compensation sought by way of advance - Conditions - Not fulfilled. - Case T-179/96 R.
European Court reports 1997 Page II-00425
Keywords
Applications for interim measures - Provisional measures - Grant of an advance payment of damages - Measure likely to prove irreversible - Conditions for granting
(EC Treaty, Art. 186)
Summary
Where it is likely in practice to be irreversible in view of the applicant's financial situation and hence might have the effect of prejudging the decision of the Court of First Instance in the main proceedings, the grant of an advance payment of damages sought by way of interim relief may be envisaged only if, on the one hand, the pleas and arguments put forward by the applicant in support of his request appear prima facie particularly strong and well founded and, on the other hand, there is undeniable urgency.
Such likelihood of irreversibility exists specifically where, in order to prove the urgency of the application, the applicant describes the risk of bankruptcy to which he is exposed by his precarious financial situation, which in itself makes it scarcely possible in practice to make the advance subject to safeguards with a view to its repayment in the event that his claim in the main proceedings is rejected.