Case T‑88/09 DEP

Idromacchine Srl and Others

v

European Commission

(Procedure — Taxation of costs)

Summary — Order of the General Court (First Chamber), 13 January 2017

1.      Judicial proceedings — Costs — Taxation — Recoverable costs — Concept — Expenses necessarily incurred by the parties

(Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Arts 91 and 140(b))

2.      Judicial proceedings — Costs — Taxation — Recoverable costs — Involvement of more than one lawyer

(Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 140(b))

3.      Judicial proceedings — Costs — Taxation — Recoverable costs — Expenses necessarily incurred by the parties — Economist’s fees — Whether permissible in cases essentially involving economic appraisals

(Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 25; Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Arts 91 and 140(b))

4.      Judicial proceedings — Costs — Taxation — Recoverable costs — Expenses necessarily incurred by the parties — Concept — Costs of communications between two lawyers of the same party — Not included

(Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 140(b))

5.      Judicial proceedings — Costs — Taxation — Elements to be taken into consideration

(Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 140(b))

6.      EU law — Principles — Right to effective judicial protection — Scope

(Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 47, first para.)

7.      EU law — Principles — Right to effective judicial protection — Amount of the costs to be borne exceeding the amount of the compensation obtained in the main proceedings — No infringement

(Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 47, first para.)

8.      Judicial proceedings — Costs — Taxation — Default interest

(Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Arts 140(b), and 170(1) and (3))

1.      See the text of the decision.

(see paras 10-12)

2.      See the text of the decision.

(see para. 17)

3.      In cases involving findings of an essentially economic nature, the involvement of economic advisers or experts in addition to the work of legal advisers may sometimes prove necessary and thus give rise to costs that are recoverable under Article 140(b) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court.

In order for that to be the case, such involvement must be objectively necessary for the purposes of the proceedings. That may be the case, inter alia, where the expert evidence is crucial for the outcome of the case, such that its production by one party has spared the Court the need to commission an expert’s report in the context of its powers pursuant to Article 25 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union and Article 91 of the Rules of Procedure.

(see paras 18, 19)

4.      The costs of communications between two lawyers representing the same party cannot be justified as expenses that have been necessarily incurred.

(see para. 25)

5.      See the text of the decision.

(see paras 29, 32, 37, 43)

6.      See the text of the decision.

(see para. 48)

7.      The right of access to justice is not breached merely by the fact that the amount of costs remaining to be borne by the applicant exceeds the amount of compensation awarded to him by the Court in the same case, even if that may have the effect of depriving him of that compensation.

Except in the case of legal aid, the costs of representation by a lawyer are incurred by anyone bringing an action before a court requiring such representation. The fact that, in the event of merely partial success of the claim, a portion of those costs may remain to be borne by the applicant is inherent in the principle, contained in the provisions of the Rules of Procedure on costs, according to which, in such cases, the parties may be ordered to bear their own costs in whole or in part. The application of those provisions cannot constitute a breach of the right of access to justice, including in a case where, by reason of a significant disparity between the amount claimed by the applicant and that finally awarded by the Court, the amount of costs that remains to be borne by the applicant exceeds the amount awarded to him in the main proceedings by the Court. It is up to any applicant to measure, before bringing an action, the risks inherent therein, including the risk of having to bear all or part of his own costs in the event of a total or partial dismissal of the action.

(see paras 49, 50)

8.      See the text of the decision.

(see paras 54, 55)