I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
Appeal – Non-contractual liability of the European Atomic Energy Community – Overflowing drain – Misinterpretation of the evidence – Measures of inquiry
3. Appeal – Grounds – Incorrect assessment of the facts – Inadmissible –Review by the Court of the assessment of the evidence – Possible only where the clear sense of the evidence has been distorted (Art. 225 EC; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58) (see para. 28)
4. Procedure – Application initiating proceedings – Formal requirements (Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 21; Rules of Procedure of the Court, Art. 112(1)(c)) (see para. 30)
Re:
Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) of 30 November 2005 in Case T‑250/02 Autosalone Ispra v Commission, in which the Court of First Instance dismissed an application for a declaration that the Community was liable for the damage allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of an overflowing drain the management and maintenance of which are the responsibility of the Joint Research Centre in Ispra – Breach of the procedural rules concerning the burden of proof.
The Court:
1.Dismisses the appeal;
2.Orders Autosalone Ispra Snc to pay the costs.