Keywords
Summary

Keywords

1. Appeals Interest in bringing proceedings Event subsequent to the judgment of the Court of First Instance having removed the prejudicial effect thereof for the prospective appellant

2. Appeals Pleas in law Plea put forward for the first time at the stage of the appeal Inadmissible

(ECSC Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 51)

3. ECSC Aid to the steel industry Prohibition Conditions Prejudicial to competition Excluded

(ECSC Treaty, Art. 4(c))

Summary

1. The Court of Justice can declare an appeal to be inadmissible where an event subsequent to the judgment of the Court of First Instance has removed the prejudicial effect thereof for the prospective appellant. The fact that the appellant has an interest in bringing the proceedings assumes that the appeal is likely, if successful, to procure an advantage to the party bringing it.

( see para. 18 )

2. To allow one party to raise for the first time before the Court of Justice a plea which it had not raised before the Court of First Instance would amount to allowing it to bring before the Court of Justice, whose jurisdiction in appeals is limited, a case of wider scope than that which was before the Court of First Instance for adjudication. On appeal, the competence of the Court of Justice is confined to examining the Court of First Instance's assessment of the pleas argued before it.

( see para. 25 )

3. Under Article 4(c) of the ECSC Treaty, unlike Article 92(1) of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 87(1) EC), for aid to be considered incompatible with the common market, it is not necessary for it to distort or threaten to distort competition. That provision of the ECSC Treaty prohibits all aid without any restriction, with the result that it cannot contain any a de minimis rule.

( see para. 41 )