EUR-Lex - 61995B0018 - EN
Avis juridique important
|
61995B0018
Order of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) of 10 December 1996.
-
Atlanta Handelsgesellschaft Harder & Co. GmbH and Internationale Fruchtimport Gesellschaft Weichert & Co. v Commission of the European Communities.
-
Common organization of the markets - Bananas - Action for annulment - Inadmissible.
-
Case T-18/95.
European Court reports 1996 Page II-01669
Summary
Keywords
Actions for annulment - Natural or legal persons - Measures of direct and individual concern to them - Regulation increasing the tariff quota for imports of bananas for traders affected by a natural disaster(EC Treaty, Art. 173, fourth para.;
Commission Regulation No 2791/94)
Summary
The action brought by banana traders for the annulment of Regulation No 2791/94 on the exceptional allocation of a quantity additional to the tariff quota for imports of bananas in 1994 as a result of tropical storm Debbie is inadmissible.In the first place, the regulation is a legislative measure of general scope.
Its purpose is to remedy the consequences of a natural disaster and it conforms with the aims of the common agricultural policy regarding stabilization of the market and the maintenance of reasonable prices for banana supplies to consumers, the operators amongst whom the additional quantity is allocated being defined in an objective way in the light of the damage caused by the tropical storm of which they were victims. In the second place, although a regulation which is a legislative measure may still be of individual concern, within the meaning of the fourth paragraph of Article 173 of the Treaty, to some traders, that is not the case with regard to the regulation at issue here.
The fact that the applicants belong to a closed category of traders ineligible, owing to the nature of their supply to the Community market, for the additional quota, is not sufficient to distinguish them from all other traders, of whatever category, who are likewise ineligible because they were not affected by the storm, and because in any event the regulation did not affect the quantities of bananas allocated to them, any more than it affected the specific rights vested in them.