Keywords
Summary

Keywords

++++

1. Appeals ° Pleas in law ° Procedural irregularity ° Need for the interests of the appellant to be adversely affected ° No adverse effect ° Dismissal

(EC Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 51; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 112(1)(c))

2. Appeals ° Pleas in law ° Mere repetition of pleas and arguments submitted to the Court of First Instance ° Inadmissibility ° Dismissal

(EC Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 51; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 112(1)(c))

Summary

1. An alteration made by the Court of First Instance to the name of the defendant as set out in the application initiating proceedings, thereby enabling the substance of an action which would otherwise have had to be declared inadmissible to be examined, is not a procedural irregularity adversely affecting the interests of the appellant within the meaning of Article 51 of the Statute of the Court of Justice, which is capable as such of being pleaded in support of an appeal.

2. The combined effect of Article 51 of the Statute of the Court of Justice and Article 112(1)(c) of the Rules of Procedure is that an appeal must indicate precisely the contested elements of the judgment of the Court of First Instance which the appellant seeks to have set aside, and also the legal arguments specifically advanced in support of the appeal.

That requirement is not satisfied by an appeal which merely repeats or reproduces word for word the pleas in law and arguments already submitted to the Court of First Instance, including those based on facts expressly rejected by that court. In reality, such an appeal amounts to no more than a request for a re-examination of the application submitted to the Court of First Instance, which the Court of Justice has no jurisdiction to undertake.