Summary
Parties
Grounds
Decision on costs
Operative part
Keywords
++++
Applications for interim measures ° Conditions of admissibility ° Main action dismissed as inadmissible
(EEC Treaty, Arts 185 and 186; Rules of Procedure of the Court, Art. 83(1))
Summary
Where the main action to which an application for interim measures attaches is dismissed as inadmissible, the latter application is itself inadmissible.
Parties
In Case C-64/93 R,
Donatab Srl, a company governed by Italian law, with its registered office in Caserta (Italy),
Reditab Srl, a company governed by Italian law, with its registered office in Rome (Italy),
Tabacchi Industrie Varie ° STIV Srl, a company governed by Italian law, with its registered office in Capaccio (Italy),
Associazione Professionale Transformatori Tabbacchi Italiani ° APTI, a professional association, with its registered office in Rome (Italy),
represented by Emilio Cappelli and Paolo de Caterini, of the Rome Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Charles Turk, 13B Avenue Guillaume,
applicants,
v
Commission of the European Communities, represented by Eugenio de March, Legal Adviser, acting as Agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of Nicola Annecchino, of its Legal Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg,
defendant,
APPLICATION to the Court for interim relief in the form, first, of an order that the operation of the Commission' s fax sent to the Italian authorities on 20 January 1993 and of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3477/92 of 1 December 1992 laying down detailed rules for the application of the raw tobacco quota system for the 1993 and 1994 harvests (OJ 1992 L 351, p. 11) be suspended and, secondly, of interim measures directing the Commission to give certain instructions to the Italian authorities,
THE PRESIDENT OF THE COURT
makes the following
Order
Grounds
1 By application lodged at the Court Registry on 12 March 1993, Donatab, two other tobacco processing companies and a professional association (hereinafter "the applicants") brought an action under the second paragraph of Article 173 of the EEC Treaty for annulment of a fax message, sent on 20 January 1993 by the Commission to the Italian authorities and sought a declaration, in accordance with Article 184 of the Treaty, that Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3477/92 of 1 December 1992 laying down detailed rules for the application of the raw tobacco quota system for the 1993 and 1994 harvests (OJ 1992 L 351, p. 11) was inapplicable.
2 By separate document lodged at the Court Registry on 18 March 1993, the applicants also submitted to the Court an application for interim relief in the form, first, of an order that operation of the aforementioned fax message from the Commission and of Articles 3(3), 9 and 10 of the abovementioned regulation be suspended and, secondly, of interim measures directing the Commission to give certain instructions to the Italian authorities in order that they might allocate as soon as possible the processing quotas and authorize in the context of those quotas the conclusion of corresponding cultivation contracts.
3 The Commission submitted observations on the application for interim measures on 16 April 1993.
4 It should be pointed out that in accordance with Article 83(1) of the Rules of Procedure an application to suspend the operation of any measure adopted by an institution or an application for other interim measures is admissible only if the Court is seised of an action in which the applicant challenges the measure the operation of which it is sought to suspend or a case to which the interim measures refer. An application for suspension or for other interim measures cannot therefore be granted if the main application to which it relates is inadmissible.
5 In this instance, the Court, by order of 28 June 1993, dismissed the main application as inadmissible.
6 The application for interim measures is therefore also inadmissible and must be dismissed.
Decision on costs
Costs
7 In accordance with Article 69(2) of the Rules of Procedure, the unsuccessful party is to be ordered to pay the costs. Since the applicants have been unsuccessful, they must be ordered to pay the costs incurred in these proceedings.
Operative part
On those grounds,
THE PRESIDENT OF THE COURT
hereby orders:
1. The application is dismissed.
2. The applicants are ordered to pay the costs.
Luxembourg, 9 July 1993.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy