Mannesmann AG and others v High Authority of the European Coal and Steel Community. [1959] EUECJ C-2/59R (30 January 1959)

Mannesmann AG and others v High Authority of the European Coal and Steel Community. [1959] EUECJ C-2/59R (30 January 1959)

The application is inadmissible because the applicants did not contest the High Authority's decisions in an earlier or concomitant main action as required by Article 63, and there was no proof that enforcement procedures had been initiated to justify admissibility under Article 64.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1959] EUECJ C-2/59R
Parties
Applicant: Niederrheinische Hutte AG; Applicant: Phoenix-Rheinrohr AG, Vereinigte Hutten- und Rohrenwerke; Applicant: Gusstahlwerke Gelsenkirchen AG; Applicant: Ruhrstahl AG; Applicant: Gusstahlwerke Witten AG; Applicant: Mannesmann AG (on behalf of Mannesmann Huttenwerke AG and Hahnsche Werke AG); Applicant: Bochumer Verein fur Gusstahlfabrikation AG; Applicant: August Thyssen-Hutte AG; Applicant: Stahlwerke Bochum AG; Applicant: Huttenwerke Oberhausen AG; Respondent: High Authority of the European Coal and Steel Community
Jurisdiction
European Union
Procedural Posture
Interim Application for Suspension of Enforcement / Order on Admissibility
Outcome
application rejected as inadmissible
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Interim Applications, Suspension of Enforcement, Procedure Under ECSC Rules
European Union Law Administrative Law Admissibility of Interim Applications Suspension of Enforcement Procedure Under ECSC Rules

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Niederrheinische Hutte AG

Applicant

Phoenix-Rheinrohr AG, Vereinigte Hutten- und Rohrenwerke

Applicant

Gusstahlwerke Gelsenkirchen AG

Applicant

Ruhrstahl AG

Applicant

Gusstahlwerke Witten AG

Applicant

Mannesmann AG (on behalf of Mannesmann Huttenwerke AG and Hahnsche Werke AG)

Applicant

Bochumer Verein fur Gusstahlfabrikation AG

Applicant

August Thyssen-Hutte AG

Applicant

Stahlwerke Bochum AG

Applicant

Huttenwerke Oberhausen AG

Applicant

High Authority of the European Coal and Steel Community

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interim Application for Suspension of Enforcement / Order on Admissibility

  1. 1 Whether an interim application for suspension of enforcement is admissible without contesting the decision in a main action
  2. 2 Whether fear of enforcement justifies admissibility under Article 64

Ratio Decidendi

The application is inadmissible because the applicants did not contest the High Authority's decisions in an earlier or concomitant main action as required by Article 63, and there was no proof that enforcement procedures had been initiated to justify admissibility under Article 64.

Court Disposition

application rejected as inadmissible

Orders

  • applicants to bear the costs