Case T-47/03 DEP

Jose Maria Sison

v

Council of the European Union

(Procedure – Taxation of costs)

Summary of the Order

1.      Procedure – Costs – Taxation – Recoverable costs – Meaning

(Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 91(b))

2.      Procedure – Costs – Taxation – Elements to be taken into consideration

(Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 91(b))

3.      Procedure – Costs – Taxation – Recoverable costs – Involvement of more than one lawyer

(Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 91(b))

1.      It follows from Article 91(b) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance that recoverable costs are limited, first, to those incurred for the purpose of the proceedings before the Court of First Instance and, secondly, to those which were necessary for that purpose.

Neither the travel expenses incurred by a lawyer in order to meet his client in person at the latter’s place of residence, nor those incurred by an applicant in order to be present in person at a hearing before the Court in Luxembourg, without his presence being requested by the Court or necessary by reason of the circumstances, nor the expenses incurred by the lawyer of one of the parties subsequent to the closing of the oral procedure, including those incurred for the purpose of being present in person at the delivery of the Court’s judgment in Luxembourg can, as a rule, be considered necessary for the purposes of the proceedings.

(see paras 30, 52)

2.      The Community Courts are not empowered to tax the fees payable by the parties to their own lawyers, but may determine the amount of those fees to be recovered from the party ordered to pay the costs. When ruling on an application for taxation of costs, the Court of First Instance is not obliged to take account of any national scale of lawyers’ fees or any agreement in that regard between the party concerned and his agents or advisers.

In the absence of Community provisions laying down fee-scales, the Court must make an unfettered assessment of the facts of the case, taking into account the purpose and nature of the proceedings, their significance from the point of view of Community law as well as the difficulties presented by the case, the amount of work generated by the proceedings for the agents and advisers involved and the financial interests which the parties had in the proceedings.

(see paras 31-32)

3.      In assessing the amount of the recoverable costs and the amount of work generated by the proceedings for the applicant’s advisers, the primary consideration of the Community judicature is the total number of hours of work which may appear to be objectively necessary for the purpose of the proceedings before the Court, irrespective of the number of lawyers who may have provided the services in question.

In that regard, in a case concerning the freezing of an applicant’s funds, the novelty and importance of the legal questions raised and the financial interests involved in the dispute will, prima facie, justify the applicant’s lawyers devoting a considerable amount of time to them.

(see paras 37-38)