This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 61997TO0039
Order of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) of 26 November 1997.#T. Port GmbH & Co. v Commission of the European Communities.#Agriculture - Common organization of the markets - Bananas - Request for the issue of additional import licences - Action for declaration of failure to act - Procedure by default - No need to adjudicate.#Case T-39/97.
Order of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) of 26 November 1997.
T. Port GmbH & Co. v Commission of the European Communities.
Agriculture - Common organization of the markets - Bananas - Request for the issue of additional import licences - Action for declaration of failure to act - Procedure by default - No need to adjudicate.
Case T-39/97.
Order of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) of 26 November 1997.
T. Port GmbH & Co. v Commission of the European Communities.
Agriculture - Common organization of the markets - Bananas - Request for the issue of additional import licences - Action for declaration of failure to act - Procedure by default - No need to adjudicate.
Case T-39/97.
European Court Reports 1997 II-02125
ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:1997:184
61997B0039
Order of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) of 26 November 1997. - T. Port GmbH & Co. v Commission of the European Communities. - Agriculture - Common organization of the markets - Bananas - Request for the issue of additional import licences - Action for declaration of failure to act - Procedure by default - No need to adjudicate. - Case T-39/97.
European Court reports 1997 Page II-02125
Keywords
Actions for failure to act - Failure remedied after the action was brought - Action rendered devoid of purpose - No need to adjudicate
(EC Treaty, Arts 175 and 176)
Summary
The remedy provided for in Article 175 of the Treaty is founded on the premiss that the failure to act on the part of a Community institution enables an action to be brought before the Court of First Instance in order to obtain a declaration that the failure to act is contrary to the Treaty, in so far as it has not been remedied by the institution concerned. The effect of that declaration under Article 176 of the Treaty is that the defendant institution is required to take the necessary measures to comply with the judgment. Where the act whose absence constitutes the subject-matter of the proceedings was adopted after the action was brought but before judgment, a declaration by the Court to the effect that the initial failure to act is unlawful can no longer lead to the result envisaged by Article 176 of the Treaty. It follows that in such a case the subject-matter of the action has ceased to exist with the result that there is no longer any need to adjudicate.