Court of Justice of the European Communities (including Court of First Instance Decisions)

You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Court of Justice of the European Communities (including Court of First Instance Decisions) >> Antillean Rice Mills NV v Council of the European Union. (Association of the overseas countries and territories) [1997] EUECJ T-41/97 (21 March 1997)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/EUECJ/1997/T4197.html
Cite as: [1997] EUECJ T-41/97

[New search] [Help]

IMPORTANT LEGAL NOTICE - The source of this judgment is the web site of the Court of Justice of the European Communities. The information in this database has been provided free of charge and is subject to a Court of Justice of the European Communities disclaimer and a copyright notice. This electronic version is not authentic and is subject to amendment.

61997B0041
Order of the President of the Court of First Instance of 21 March 1997.
Antillean Rice Mills NV v Council of the European Union.
Association of the overseas countries and territories - Safeguard measure - Application for interim measures - Application for suspension of operation - Urgency - None.
Case T-41/97 R.
European Court reports 1997 Page II-00447

Applications for interim measures - Suspension of operation of a measure - Conditions for granting - Serious and irreparable damage - Financial loss - Limited duration of the contested measure
(EC Treaty, Art. 185; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2))

In the context of the examination of the urgency of a request for suspension of the operation of a measure, financial loss is in principle not considered to be serious and irreparable unless, in the event of the applicant's being successful in the main proceedings, it could not be wholly recouped. That might be so in particular where the damage threatened the very existence of the undertaking in question or where, once having occurred, it could not be quantified.
Where the applicant has not demonstrated that it is in danger of suffering irreversible damage as a result of the application of the contested regulation, appropriate compensation could be awarded were the contested regulation to be annulled by the Court in the main proceedings, even if that regulation is applicable only for a limited period. The circumstance that a regulation had already been implemented and its period of application had expired would not deprive the applicant of adequate protection of its interests, since the institution concerned would have to take the necessary measures to comply with the judgment and might thus be required to take adequate steps to restore the applicant to its original situation or to avoid the adoption of an identical measure.

About BAILII - FAQ - Copyright Policy - Disclaimers - Privacy Policy amended on 25/11/2010