# C_2004217EN.01002402.xml

| 28.8.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 217/24 |
| --------- | -- | -------------------------------------- | -------- |

---

Action brought on 28 May 2004 by the Regione Autonoma della Sardegna against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-200/04)

(2004/C 217/45)

Language of the case: Italian

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 28 May 2004 by the Regione Autonoma della Sardegna, represented by Domenico Dodaro, lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | declare invalid that part of Commission Decision C(2004) 471of 16 March 2004 holding aid granted by Italy through Article 5 of Law No 22 of the Region of Sardinia of 17 November 2000 to be incompatible with the common market; |
| - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| - | -------------------------------------- |

Pleas in law and main arguments:

In the contested decision, the Commission initiated the procedure under Article 88(2) of the Treaty declaring that aid granted by Article 5 of Regional Law 22/2000, providing for ‘interventions in favour of breeders to confront the epizootic disease of blue tongue’, was incompatible with the common market. That law provided for a series of interventions in favour of breeders who had suffered the negative effects of blue tongue.

In support of its claims the applicant pleads the following grounds:

| — | infringement of essential procedural requirements: The Commission's preliminary investigations for assessing the compatibility of the aid were insufficient in that they did not take account of information available in the notification report and subsequently supplemented by the Region of Sardinia, and in particular of the following circumstances:
—
the aid is not intended for processing undertakings but is a necessary additional compensation for producers' loss of income resulting from higher fixed costs of Cooperatives when distributing net proceeds; —
the causal relationship between the epizootic disease and the reduction in grants cannot be proven in abstract terms but is dependent on the practical implementation of the aid rules, which are structured in such a way as to exclude the allocation of aid on grounds other than those dependent on blue tongue. The hypothetical grounds referred to for the reduction in grants are insufficient and are contrary to facts known to the European Commission. —
the cooperatives receiving the aid do not have any flexibility to access alternative sources of supply. | — | the aid is not intended for processing undertakings but is a necessary additional compensation for producers' loss of income resulting from higher fixed costs of Cooperatives when distributing net proceeds; | — | the causal relationship between the epizootic disease and the reduction in grants cannot be proven in abstract terms but is dependent on the practical implementation of the aid rules, which are structured in such a way as to exclude the allocation of aid on grounds other than those dependent on blue tongue. The hypothetical grounds referred to for the reduction in grants are insufficient and are contrary to facts known to the European Commission. | — | the cooperatives receiving the aid do not have any flexibility to access alternative sources of supply. |
| - | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | - | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | - | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | - | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| — | the aid is not intended for processing undertakings but is a necessary additional compensation for producers' loss of income resulting from higher fixed costs of Cooperatives when distributing net proceeds; | | | | | | |
| — | the causal relationship between the epizootic disease and the reduction in grants cannot be proven in abstract terms but is dependent on the practical implementation of the aid rules, which are structured in such a way as to exclude the allocation of aid on grounds other than those dependent on blue tongue. The hypothetical grounds referred to for the reduction in grants are insufficient and are contrary to facts known to the European Commission. | | | | | | |
| — | the cooperatives receiving the aid do not have any flexibility to access alternative sources of supply. | | | | | | |

| — | infringement of the provisions of the EC Treaty and the principles of law relating to its application, in so far as:
—
the Commission infringed the principle of effectiveness by excluding the application of Article 87(2)(b), partly because that provision was not invoked by the Italian authorities. In accordance with that principle, the applicant argues, the Commission should have given sufficient reasons for not applying it, the Italian authorities' failure to invoke it being insufficient. —
the Commission infringed Article 87(3)(c) by overlooking the fact that the measure now alleged to be incompatible with the common market is identical with the measures approved by the Commission in Decision SG(01) D/285817 of 2 February 2001, concerning Article 3 of Regional Law 22/2000. | — | the Commission infringed the principle of effectiveness by excluding the application of Article 87(2)(b), partly because that provision was not invoked by the Italian authorities. In accordance with that principle, the applicant argues, the Commission should have given sufficient reasons for not applying it, the Italian authorities' failure to invoke it being insufficient. | — | the Commission infringed Article 87(3)(c) by overlooking the fact that the measure now alleged to be incompatible with the common market is identical with the measures approved by the Commission in Decision SG(01) D/285817 of 2 February 2001, concerning Article 3 of Regional Law 22/2000. |
| - | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | - | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | - | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
| — | the Commission infringed the principle of effectiveness by excluding the application of Article 87(2)(b), partly because that provision was not invoked by the Italian authorities. In accordance with that principle, the applicant argues, the Commission should have given sufficient reasons for not applying it, the Italian authorities' failure to invoke it being insufficient. | | | | |
| — | the Commission infringed Article 87(3)(c) by overlooking the fact that the measure now alleged to be incompatible with the common market is identical with the measures approved by the Commission in Decision SG(01) D/285817 of 2 February 2001, concerning Article 3 of Regional Law 22/2000. | | | | |

---