Locus standi under Article 173 of the E.C. Treaty

Abstract

Locus standi under Article 173 of the E. C. Treaty is divided into two categories; the first relates to institutions and the second one relates to national and legal persons. It is harder for this latter category to be granted locus standi. The rights of ordinary persons to bring proceedings are restricted, because they may bring proceedings against only one kind of legal act: a decision. If the decision is specifically addressed to the applicant, he is granted standing without the need to establish direct and individual concern. In the Court's early case-law, the strict approach was predominant. The European Court , continually refused to grant admissability, where the contested measure was a true regulation. The cases, where an application to challenge a true regulation was granted standing, under Article 173, are few. Indeed, these were regarded as exceptions to the rule. However, throughout the evolution of the Court's case-law, the approach was relaxed. Infact, the Court has become more lenient in granting judicial protection to the individual. The culmination of the Court's flexible approach appeared in the Codorniu case, where an action to challenge a true regulation was declared admissable, because it was considered of direct and individual concern. An interesting question to be discussed further in this thesis, is what will be the position after Codorniu. Will the C.F .I. follow follow the example set out in this case? Or will it continue on the approach adopted in the preceding cases? Finally, one would also have to mention the other possibilities the individual may have, if he fails in seeking to bring an action under Article 173. Other possibilities include, bringing an indirect challenge before the national court under Article 177 and an action for compensation for damages under Article 178.