- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Order of the Court of 14 October 1981. # Krupp Stahl AG v Commission of the European Communities. # Cases 123/81 and 123/81 R.
ECLI:EU:C:1981:232
61981CO0123
With us you find everything. Try it now!
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
Avis juridique important
61981O0123
European Court reports 1981 Page 02391
Parties
KRUPP STAHL AG , BOCHUM ,
APPLICANT ,
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ,
DEFENDANT .
Grounds
IN CASES 123/81 AND 123/81 R , THE COMMISSION ADOPTED A DECISION WHICH WAS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE WISHES OF THE APPLICANT , WHICH THEN INFORMED THE COURT IN A LETTER RECEIVED AT THE REGISTRY ON 2 JULY 1981 THAT IT WAS NO LONGER NECESSARY TO GIVE JUDGMENT IN THE MAIN ACTION OR , CONSEQUENTLY , ON THE APPLICATION FOR THE ADOPTION OF INTERIM MEASURES . IT NONE THE LESS SOUGHT AN ORDER FOR COSTS AGAINST THE COMMISSION , ARGUING THAT THE COMMISSION ' S DELAY IN ADOPTING ITS DECISION WAS AT THE ROOT OF THE ACTION AND THAT THE DECISION FINALLY ADOPTED HAD RECOGNIZED THAT THE APPLICATIONS WERE WELL FOUNDED .
IN ITS OBSERVATIONS LODGED AT THE COURT REGISTRY ON 14 JULY 1981 THE COMMISSION STATED THAT IT WAS NOT OPPOSED TO WHAT IT REGARDED AS AN APPLICATION TO DISCONTINUE THE ACTION ON THE PART OF THE APPLICANT , BUT IT SOUGHT AN ORDER FOR COSTS AGAINST THE APPLICANT . IN SUPPORT OF THAT CLAIM THE COMMISSION ARGUED THAT THE DELAY IN THE ADOPTION OF ITS FINAL DECISION WAS DUE TO THE APPLICANT ' S OWN CONDUCT .
IT IS TRUE THAT BY A LETTER DATED 16 MARCH 1981 THE APPLICANT INFORMED THE COMMISSION THAT IT DESIRED THE COMMISSION TO RECOGNIZE THAT ITS PRODUCTIVE CAPACITY WAS GREATER THAT THAT USED FOR THE CALCULATION OF THE QUOTAS FOR THE FIRST QUARTER OF 1981 . HOWEVER , THAT REQUEST WAS WITHDRAWN BY THE APPLICANT IN A LETTER DATED 15 APRIL . ALTHOUGH THE COMMISSION HAS NOT PLEADED THE EXISTENCE OF ANY OTHER FACTOR LIABLE TO PREVENT IT FROM ADOPTING A DECISION WITHOUT DELAY , IT WAS NOT UNTIL 26 MAY 1981 THAT IT FIXED DEFINITIVE QUOTAS FOR THE APPLICANT FOR THE SECOND QUARTER OF 1981 . IT WAS PRECISELY THAT DELAY WHICH INDUCED THE APPLICANT TO LODGE THE PRESENT APPLICATIONS , WHICH SINCE THE ADOPTION OF THE COMMISSION ' S DECISION HAVE LOST THEIR PURPOSE .
IT FOLLOWS THAT THE APPLICANT ' S DISCONTINUANCE IS JUSTIFIED BY THE CONDUCT OF THE COMMISSION AND THAT THERE IS REASON TO ORDER THE LATTER TO PAY THE COSTS PURSUANT TO THE FIRST SUBPARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 69 ( 4 ) OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE .