Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 26 September 2000 in Case T-80/97: Starway SA v Council of the European Union (Extension of an anti-dumping duty — Exemption — Action for annulment — Admissibility — Assembly operation — Burden of proof — Statement of reasons — Manifest error of assessment)
Date: 2001-01-06
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: Council of the European Union, action for annulment (EU), anti-dumping duty, import, two-wheeled vehicle

6.1.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 4/5

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 26 September 2000

Action brought on 6 September 2000 by Fondazione
Opera S. Maria della Carità against Commission of the
European Communities

in Case T-80/97: Starway SA v Council of the European
Union (1)

(Extension of an anti-dumping duty — Exemption — Action
for annulment — Admissibility — Assembly operation —
Burden of proof — Statement of reasons — Manifest error
of assessment)

(Case T-234/00)

(2001/C 4/07)

(Language of the case: Italian)

(2001/C 4/06)

(Language of the case: French)

In Case T-80/97: Starway SA, established in Luynes (France),
represented by J.-F. Bellis and P. De Baere, of the Brussels Bar,
with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of
L. Lorang, 3 Rue de la Chapelle, against Council of the
European Union (Agents: R. Torrent, A. Tanca, S. Marquardt
and P. Bentley) supported by Commission of the European
Communities (Agent: N. Khan) — application for annulment
of Article 2 of Council Regulation (EC) No 71/97 of 10 January
1997 extending the definitive anti-dumping duty imposed by
Regulation (EEC) No 2474/93 on bicycles originating in the
People’s Republic of China to imports of certain bicycle parts
from the People’s Republic of China, and levying the extended
duty on such imports registered under Regulation (EC)
No 703/96 (OJ 1997 L 16, p. 55, corrigendum (Spanish and
French versions only) published in OJ 1997 L 95, p. 30)
— the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber, Extended
Composition), composed of: K. Lenaerts, President, V. Tiili,
J. Azizi, M. Jaeger and P. Mengozzi, Judges; B. Pastor, Principal
Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on
26 September 2000, in which it:

1. Annuls Article 2 of Council Regulation (EC) No 71/97 of
10 January 1997 extending the definitive anti-dumping duty
imposed by Regulation (EEC) No 2474/93 on bicycles
originating in the People’s Republic of China to imports of
certain bicycle parts from the People’s Republic of China, and
levying the extended duty on such imports registered under
Regulation (EC) No 703/96, in so far as it concerns imports
of essential bicycle parts by the applicant between 20 April
1996 and 18 April 1997;

2. Orders the Council to bear its own costs and to pay those

incurred by the applicant;

3. Orders the Commission to bear its own costs.

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 6 September 2000 by Fondazione
Opera S. Maria della Carità, represented by Franca Gajulli and
Isabella Gianniotti, of the Venice Bar.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul Articles 1, 2, 5 and 6 of Commission Decision
2000/394/EEC of 25 November 1999 on aid to firms in
Venice and Chioggia by way of relief from social security
contributions under Laws Nos 30/1997 and 206/1995,
or annul Articles 1, 2, 5 and 6 thereof, and declare
applicable the exemption provided for by Article 86(2) of
the Treaty (services of general economic interest) to the
applicant;

— order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The decision contested in the present case is the same as that
in Case T-218/00 Cooperativa Mare Azzurro and Others (1).

The pleas in law and main arguments are those relied upon in
Cases T-231/00 Adriatica di Navigazione v Commission (1).

The applicant refutes the charge that there is a constituent
element of aid in the present case, pointing out that its
activities consist overall in the provision of complementary
services in the public interest carried out, under arrangements
agreed with the local authorities, whenever the latter, whose
responsibility they are, are unable to do so directly themselves.

(1) OJ C 212 of 12.7.97.

(1) Not yet published.