Case C-452/00: Action brought on 6 December 2000 by the Kingdom of the Netherlands against the Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2001-02-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Netherlands, action for annulment (EU), import, overseas countries and territories, sugar product

C 45/12

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

10.2.2001

Action brought on 6 December 2000 by the Kingdom of
the Netherlands against the Commission of the European
Communities

The applicant claims that the Court should:

(Case C-452/00)

(2001/C 45/23)

— annul the Commission Decision C(2000) 2754 final of
20 September 2000 on State aid put into effect by France
in the wine sector;

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of Justice of the European
Communities on 6 December 2000 by the Kingdom of the
Netherlands, represented by J. van Bakel, of the European Law
Section in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

1. Annul Commission Regulation (EC) No 2081/2000 (1)
of 29 September 2000 providing for the continued
application of safeguard measures for imports from the
overseas countries and territories of sugar sector products
with EC/OCT cumulation of origin;

2. Order the Commission to pay the costs of the proceed-

ings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those in
Case C-180/00 (2). Article 109(2) of the OCT decision has also
been infringed inasmuch as the safeguard measures adopted
are not appropriate for removing the difficulties which the
Commission considers to be present.

(1) OJ 2000 L 246 of 30.09.2000, p. 64.
(2) OJ 2000 C 211 of 22.07.2000, p. 10.

Action brought on 18 December 2000 by French Republic
against Commission of the European Communities

(Case C-456/00)

(2001/C 45/24)

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of Justice of the European
Communities on 18 December 2000 by the French Republic,
represented by G. de Bergues, head of sub-directorate at the
Legal Affairs Directorate of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and
by L. Bernheim, secretary for foreign affairs at the same
ministry, acting as Agents, with an address for service in
Luxembourg at the French Embassy, 8B Boulevard Joseph II.

— order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

on

decision,

Commission

— The Commission was wrong to base itself, in the contest-
ed
Regulation
No 1493/2000 (1). The aid was notified in February
1999 under Regulation No 822/87 (2). Although the
Commission decision was adopted in September 2000
under the new Regulation No 1493/1999 (3), which
entered into force on 21 July 1999, it was Regulation No
822/87 which was binding on the Member States until
August 2000, that is to say during nearly the whole of
the period when the Commission investigated the aid.

— (In the alternative)

Incompatibility of
decision with Regulation No 1493/2000

the contested

— The Commission is wrong to find the French
aid incompatible on the ground that it does not
sufficiently reduce yields of the Ugni-blanc grape
variety. Contrary to what the Commission main-
tains, Regulation No 1493/1999 does not establish
a correlation between the conversion of land and
any obligation on the Member States to reduce yield
— and thus production — on non-converted land.

for

— Error in law: by requiring an ‘assurance that restruc-
turing of 1 000 hectares would be accompanied by
grubbing-up of an equivalent area’, the Commission
adds a condition to the conversion of vineyards
provided
in Article 11 of Regulation
No 1493/1999, whereas there is nothing in that
Article to say that conversion of a given area must
be accompanied by the grubbing-up of an equivalent
area. Limitation of the right to replant on converted
surfaces provided for by Commission Regulation
No 1227/2000 (4), and in particular Article 13
thereof, cannot be treated like the grubbing up of
non-converted land.