Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T02:34:47.507Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Firma J. Nold, K. G. Kohlen- und Baustoffgrosshandlung, Darmstadt v. The High Authority.

Court of Justice of the European Coal and Steel Community.  20 March 1959 .

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

Get access

Abstract

Court of Justice of European Coal and Steel Community — Procedure — Barristers and advocates — Capacity to appear before Court after being prohibited from practising in national State — Effect of prohibition on validity of prior acts by barrister connected with action before the Court.

Procedure — Request for injunction — Time for making request — Effect of principal action being out of time — Rules of Court, Article 83.

Capacity of parties — Capacity of unincorporated firm to proceed against application to it of trade regulations alleged to be in breach of Treaty establishing Community — Necessity for plaintiff to have status of “producer ” — Effect of Article 80 equating distributing organization with producers for purposes of certain appeals to Court — Whether Article 80 aplicable to actions based upon indirect effects of Articles 65 and 66.

Capacity of parties — Company in liquidation — Law governing legal status and capacity of company — Law applied by Court in determining locus standi of representative of company before it.

International organization — European Coal and Steel Community — Decisions of High Authority — Grounds for grant by Court of suspension of application of decisions — Treaty establishing Community, Article 33 — Distinction between individual and general decisions — Decisions authorizing trade regulations — Retention of private law character of such trade regulations — Decisions indirectly affecting legal validity of actions by individual enterprises — Whether decisions general or individual — Whether decision which is individual with regard to enterprise to which addressed may also be general with regard to third parties — Decision amounting to discrimination against third parties — Violation of Treaty, Articles 15 and 65 (2) — Relevance of alleged violation of Federal German Constitution — Détournement de pouvoir — Violation of substantial procedural requirement — Purpose of obligation of High Authority under Article 15 to give reasons for decisions — Whether Court of Community may consider ex propria motu possible failure to give reasons — Whether insufficient reasons equivalent to absence of reasons for purposes of Articles 15.

Type
Case Report
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 1963

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)