Filippo de Jorio v Council of the European Union. (Allowances for members of the Economic and Social Committee) [1997] EUECJ T-64/96 (6 February 1997)

Filippo de Jorio v Council of the European Union. (Allowances for members of the Economic and Social Committee) [1997] EUECJ T-64/96 (6 February 1997)

The application was manifestly inadmissible because it failed to meet the formal requirements for stating pleas in law and did not comply with the pre-litigation procedure required for actions for failure to act.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1997] EUECJ T-64/96
Parties
Applicant: Filippo de Jorio; Respondent: Council of the European Union
Jurisdiction
European Union
Procedural Posture
Action for Annulment and Failure to Act / Order on Admissibility
Outcome
application dismissed as manifestly inadmissible
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Applications, Formal Requirements for Proceedings, Failure to Act
European Union Law Administrative Law Admissibility of Applications Formal Requirements for Proceedings Failure to Act

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Filippo de Jorio

Applicant

Council of the European Union

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Action for Annulment and Failure to Act / Order on Admissibility

  1. 1 Whether the application met the formal requirements under Article 19 of the Statute of the Court of Justice and Article 44(1)(c) of the Rules of Procedure
  2. 2 Whether the pre-litigation procedure under Article 175 EC Treaty was properly followed

Ratio Decidendi

The application was manifestly inadmissible because it failed to meet the formal requirements for stating pleas in law and did not comply with the pre-litigation procedure required for actions for failure to act.

Court Disposition

application dismissed as manifestly inadmissible

Orders

  • The application is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.