ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE FOURTH CHAMBER OF THE GENERAL COURT
10 March 2011(*)
(Legal aid)
In Case T‑320/07 AJ II,
Glen Jones and Daphne Jones, residing in Neath (United Kingdom), represented by S. Llewellyn Jones, Solicitor,
applicants,
v
European Commission, represented by V. Di Bucci and J. Samnadda, acting as Agents,
defendant,
APPLICATION for legal aid,
THE PRESIDENT OF THE FOURTH CHAMBER OF THE GENERAL COURT
makes the following
Order
1 By application filed at the Registry of the General Court on 24 August 2007, the applicants brought an action pursuant to Article 230 EC seeking annulment of the Decision of 18 June 2007 by which the European Commission rejected the complaint which they had lodged against the Central Electricity Generating Board (CEGB), in relation to an alleged practice of discriminatory pricing applied by the CEGB in the purchase of coal intended for use in the production of electricity.
2 By documents lodged at the Registry of the General Court on 6 November 2008 and 21 November 2008 respectively, Mr Glen Jones and Mrs Daphne Jones requested the General Court to grant them legal aid pursuant to Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court.
3 By order of 28 April 2009 in Case T-320/07 AJ Jones and Jones (not published in the ECR), the President of the Sixth Chamber granted that application up to an amount which was not, in principle, to exceed the sum of EUR 4 000, excluding value added tax, and appointed Mrs Llewellyn Jones as the lawyer to assist the applicants.
4 As the composition of the Chambers of the General Court was altered, the Judge‑Rapporteur was assigned to the Fourth Chamber, to which the case in the main proceedings was, accordingly, assigned.
5 By documents lodged at the Registry of the General Court on 14 February 2011, Mr Glen Jones and Mrs Daphne Jones submitted an additional application for legal aid.
6 In support of their application they provided a certain number of supporting documents.
7 The Commission did not respond to the General Court’s invitation to it to lodge observations on the application for legal aid.
8 Under Article 96(2) of the Rules of Procedure, the decision on the application for legal aid is taken by the President by way of an order, which must, if it refuses the legal aid applied for, state the reasons on which it is based.
9 Under Article 94(2) and (3) of the Rules of Procedure, the grant of legal aid is subject to two conditions. First, the applicant, because of his economic situation, must be wholly or partly unable to meet the costs involved in legal assistance and representation by a lawyer before the Court and, second, his action must not appear to be manifestly inadmissible or manifestly unfounded.
10 In the present case, it must be borne in mind that, by order of 28 April 2009 in Jones and Jones, the applicants have already been granted legal aid on the ground that the two conditions laid down in Article 94(2) and (3) of the Rules of Procedure were met. Furthermore, the supporting documents submitted by the applicants do not show a significant change in their economic situation.
11 As regards the amount of legal aid, under the third subparagraph of Article 96(3) of the Rules of Procedure, the order granting that aid may specify an amount to be paid to the lawyer instructed to represent the person concerned or fix a limit which the lawyer’s disbursements and fees may not, in principle, exceed.
12 In the order of 28 April 2009 in Jones and Jones, the decision on the amount of disbursements and fees which may be charged to legal aid was reserved and a limit of EUR 4 000 was fixed.
13 After granting legal aid by the order of 28 April 2009, the General Court requested that the applicants answer a series of complex legal and factual questions. The additional work resulting from the need to answer those questions justifies the limit which the lawyer’s disbursements and fees may not, in principle, exceed being raised by EUR 2 000. The decision on the amount of disbursements and fees which may be charged to legal aid remains reserved.
On those grounds,
THE PRESIDENT OF THE FOURTH CHAMBER OF THE GENERAL COURT
hereby orders:
The disbursements and fees which may be charged to the legal aid granted to Mr Glen Jones and Mrs Daphne Jones by order of the General Court of 28 April 2009 in Case T‑320/07 AJ Jones and Jones should not, in principle, exceed the sum of EUR 6 000, excluding value added tax.
Luxembourg, 10 March 2011.