This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 61998TO0043
Order of the President of the Court of First Instance of 14 August 1998. # Emesa Sugar (Free Zone) NV v Council of the European Union. # Association arrangements for overseas countries and territories - Decisions 91/482/EEC and 97/803/EC - Proceedings for interim relief - Intervention - Urgency - None. # Case T-43/98 R.
Digriet tal-President tal-Qorti tal-Prim'Istanza ta' l-14 ta' Awwissu 1998.
Emesa Sugar (Free Zone) NV vs il-Kunsill ta' l-Unjoni Ewropea.
Proċedura għal miżuri provviżorji - Intervent.
Kawża T-43/98 R.
Digriet tal-President tal-Qorti tal-Prim'Istanza ta' l-14 ta' Awwissu 1998.
Emesa Sugar (Free Zone) NV vs il-Kunsill ta' l-Unjoni Ewropea.
Proċedura għal miżuri provviżorji - Intervent.
Kawża T-43/98 R.
ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:1998:190
- Date of document:
- 14/08/1998
- Date lodged:
- 10/03/1998
- Author:
- Il-Qorti tal-Prim’Istanza
- Country or organisation from which the request originates:
- Aruba, Dejta provviżorja
- Form:
- Digriet
- Additional information:
- POURVOI ? C-363/98
- Authentic language:
- Olandiż
- Type of procedure:
- Rikors għal annullament, Talba għal intervent - fondata, Talba għal proċeduri sommarji - mhux fondata
- Treaty:
- Trattat li jistabbilixxi l-Komunità Ekonomika Ewropea
- Link
- Select all documents mentioning this document
- Affected by case:
-
- Declared void by 61998CO0363
- Instruments cited in case law:
-
- 11957E/PRO/CJ/37-L2: N 33
- 11992E132: N 33
- 11992E132-P1: N 28
- 11992E133: N 33
- 11992E133-P1: N 2 28
- 11992E136-L2: N 1
- 11992E185: N 35
- 11992E186: N 35
- 11992EN04: N 27
- 31988D0591-A04: N 35
- 31991D0482-A101: N 15
- 31991D0482-A101P1: N 3
- 31991D0482-A102: N 4
- 31991D0482-A108BIS: N 13 57
- 31991D0482-A108P1: N 5
- 31991D0482-A108TER: N 13 32 57
- 31991D0482-A108TERP1: N 14
- 31991D0482-A108TERP2: N 14
- 31991D0482-A204P1: N 8
- 31991D0482: N 1 11
- 31991D0482-N2A06P2: N 7
- 31991Q0530-A104P1: N 36
- 31991Q0530-A104P2: N 36
- 31997D0803: N 11 13 15
- 61989CO0076-N15: N 55
- 61991CJ0213-N24: N 71
- 61993TJ0480-N92: N 29
- 61993TJ0480-N93: N 30
- 61993TJ0480-N94: N 31
- 61995TO0079-N36: N 56
- 61995TO0168-N42: N 72
- 61996CO0268-N30: N 36
- 61996TO0179(01)-N22: N 61
- 61997TO0310-N64: N 60
- 61997TO0310-N65: N 61
- Notes relating to the decision:
-
- Van der Burg, F.H.: Administratiefrechtelijke beslissingen ; Rechtspraak bestuursrecht 1998 nº 379
- Subject matter:
- Case law directory code:
-
61998B0043
Order of the President of the Court of First Instance of 14 August 1998. - Emesa Sugar (Free Zone) NV v Council of the European Union. - Association arrangements for overseas countries and territories - Decisions 91/482/EEC and 97/803/EC - Proceedings for interim relief - Intervention - Urgency - None. - Case T-43/98 R.
European Court reports 1998 Page II-03055
Keywords
Applications for interim measures - Suspension of operation of a measure - Conditions for granting - Urgency - Serious and irreparable damage - Appraisal allowing for the Community institution's discretion - Financial damage
(EC Treaty, Art. 185; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2))
Summary
The urgency of an application for interim measures must be assessed in relation to the necessity for an interim order to prevent serious and irreparable damage to the party applying for those measures. It is for the party seeking suspension of the operation of a contested decision to prove that it cannot wait for the outcome of the main proceedings without suffering damage that would entail serious and irreparable consequences.
As regards the introduction, within the framework of the association arrangements for overseas countries and territories, of tariff quotas for the importation of certain agricultural products free of customs duties, the judge hearing an application for interim measures may not, save in a situation of manifest urgency, override the Council's assessment as to the choice of the most appropriate measure to prevent disruption of the Community market for the products concerned, without running the risk of encroaching upon the Council's discretion. It follows that the request cannot be granted unless the urgency of the measures sought appears undeniable.
Purely financial damage cannot, save in exceptional circumstances, be regarded as irreparable since it can be made good by pecuniary compensation. The existence of exceptional circumstances may be found where it appears that, without the interim measure sought, the party concerned could be placed in a situation liable to endanger its very existence or to alter its market share irreversibly.
