Judgment_paragraph 35 · Giovanni Frajese v European Commission (C-586/23 P)

35In the third place, it must be borne in mind that, according to settled case-law, the obligation to state reasons does not require the General Court to provide an account which follows exhaustively and one by one all the arguments put forward by the parties to the case. The General Court’s reasoning may therefore be implicit, on condition that it enables the persons concerned to know the grounds of the General Court’s decision and provides the Court of Justice with sufficient material for it to exercise its power of review. Furthermore, the obligation to state reasons is an essential procedural requirement that must be distinguished from the question whether the reasoning is well founded, which goes to the substantive legality of the measure at issue (judgment of 29 April 2021, Achemos Grupė and Achema v Commission, C‑847/19 P, EU:C:2021:343, paragraphs 61 and 62 and the case-law cited).

Giovanni Frajese v European Commission (C-586/23 P)

Key facts

Connections

History · 1 version