Keywords
Summary

Keywords

1. Procedure – Costs – Taxation – Recoverable costs – Definition – Costs paid by a person not a party to the proceedings – Inclusion – Conditions

(Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 91)

2. Procedure – Costs – Taxation – Recoverable costs – Definition – Costs incurred by the parties in the phase before the action is lodged – Not included

(Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Arts 90 and 91)

3. Procedure – Costs – Taxation – Factors to be taken into consideration

(Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 91(b))

4. Procedure – Costs – Taxation – Factors to be taken into consideration

(Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 91(b))

Summary

1. Under Article 91 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, recoverable costs are limited, firstly, to those incurred for the purpose of the proceedings before the General Court and, secondly, to those which are necessary for that purpose.

Furthermore, the expression ‘expenses incurred by the parties’ refers to the expenses arising from the proceedings in which the parties have participated. That expression does not therefore refer only to the expenses which have actually been borne by the parties. Thus, expenses incurred for the purpose of the proceedings before the Court and necessary for that purpose, even if they have, in fact, been paid by a person not party to the proceedings, are recoverable. For it to be otherwise, the party ordered to pay the costs must demonstrate to the requisite legal standard that the interests pursued by the third party are distinct from those of the other party to the main proceedings.

(see paras 25-27)

2. Even though substantial legal work is generally carried out in the course of the proceedings preceding the judicial phase, by ‘proceedings’, Article 91 of the Rules of Procedure refers only to proceedings before the General Court, to the exclusion of any prior stage. That follows, in particular, from Article 90 of the Rules of Procedure, which refers to ‘proceedings before the General Court’.

Consequently, a request should be rejected in so far as it seeks the reimbursement of costs relating to the period preceding the judicial phase, and in particular, to the intervention of lawyers with the Commission, or the recovery of costs from the Commission which relate to the period during which no procedural step was taken. Indeed, during that period, such costs do not appear to be directly connected to the intervention of the party’s lawyer before the Court and cannot, therefore, be regarded as costs necessary for the purpose of the proceedings, within the meaning of Article 91 of the Rules of Procedure. Similarly, a request should be rejected in so far as it seeks the reimbursement from the Commission of costs relating to the preparation of an action before a national court.

(see paras 31-33, 35)

3. The Courts of the European Union are not empowered to tax the fees payable by the parties to their own lawyers, but may determine the extent to which those fees may be recovered from the party ordered to pay the costs. When ruling on an application for taxation of costs, the General Court is not obliged to take account of any national scale of lawyers’ fees or any agreement in that regard between the party concerned and his agents or advisers.

In the absence of provisions of European Union law laying down fee scales, the General Court must make an unfettered assessment of the facts of the case, taking into account the purpose and nature of the proceedings, their significance from the point of view of EU law, the difficulties presented by the case, the amount of work generated by the case for the agents or advisers involved and the financial interest which the parties had in the proceedings.

(see paras 37-38)

4. In assessing the extent of the work generated by the judicial proceedings, it is for the Court to take into account the amount of work objectively required for the whole of the judicial proceedings.

However, where a party’s lawyers have already assisted that party during proceedings or procedures prior to the relevant action, it is also necessary to have regard to the fact that those lawyers are aware of matters relevant to the action, which is likely to have facilitated their work and reduced the preparation time required for the judicial proceedings. That finding is, in principle, still the same where the number of applicants is significant, because all the actions to be accomplished in that situation are formal and standardised, and do not affect the legal content of the case.

Furthermore, while it may be permissible to entrust the defence of a party’s interests to several advisors at the same time, so as to secure the services of more experienced lawyers, the primary consideration must be the total number of hours of work which appear to be objectively necessary for the purpose of the proceedings before the Court, irrespective of the number of lawyers between whom the services rendered could be distributed.

(see paras 42-44, 46)