Case T-231/02: Action brought on 2 August 2002 by Piero Gonnelli and the Associazione Italiana Frantoiani Oleari (AIFO) against the Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2002-09-28
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: action for annulment (EU), consumer information, marketing standard, olive oil, product quality

C 233/32

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

28.9.2002

Action brought on 31 July 2002 by Osman Ocalan on
behalf of Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) and Serif Vanly
on behalf of Kurdistan National Congress (KNK) against
the Council of the European Union

considered under the Regulation must be presently
engaged in terrorism. In fact, since July 1999, the PKK
has dropped its demand for Kurdish independence and
has merely sought the recognition, through peaceful and
political means,

(Case T-229/02)

(2002/C 233/56)

— Breach of internationally recognised right of self-determi-

nation, of cultural, civil and political rights.

(Language of the case: English)

— Breach of fundamental rights of expression and associ-

ation.

An action against the Council of the European Union was
brought before the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities on 31 July 2002 by Osman Ocalan on behalf of
Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) and Serif Vanly on behalf of
Kurdistan National Congress (KNK), represented by Mark
instructed by
Muller, barrister, Edward Grieves, barrister,
Gareth Pierce, partner at Birnberg, Peirce and partners, 14
Inverness Street, London NW1 7HJ, UK.

The applicants claim that the Court should:

— declare void the Council Decision 2002/334/EC of 2 May
2002 and the attendant decision dated 17 June 2002 in
respect of its proscription of the PKK,

— alternatively declare Regulation 2508/2001 illegal

in

respect of its application to the applicants,

— order the Council to pay the costs incurred by the

applicants in the present proceedings,

— order the Council to pay damages.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The present Application is brought for partial annulement of
decisions 2002/334/EC and its successor 2002/460/EC, which
places PKK upon the EU terrorist list. These decisions were
made pursuant to the challenged Regulation no 2580/2001.

On support of its conclusions, the Applicants submit the
following grounds:

— Failure to apply the criteria to the correct facts and/or
have regard to the law of armed conflict where relevant.
It is stated on this topic that the Council has imposed a
ban upon a non-existent (recently disolved), organisation,
which, by definition, was incapable of being presently or
in the future engaged in terrorism. Alternatively, if which
is denied, the PKK is held to continue to exist as an
organisation, the Council wholly failed to adhere to the
requirement that any putative organisation required to be

— Breach of other principles of Community Law such as
proportionality, certainty, equality and right to a fair
hearing.

— Misuse of power, in that the Council’s inclusion of the
PKK in the list
in question should be as a result of
political pressure from Turkey and not as a result of any
meaningful application of the aforesaid criteria to the
facts.

Action brought on 2 August 2002 by Piero Gonnelli and
the Associazione Italiana Frantoiani Oleari (AIFO) against
the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-231/02)

(2002/C 233/57)

(Language of the case: Italian)

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 2 August 2002 by Piero Gonnelli
and the Associazione Italiana Frantoiani Oleari (AIFO), rep-
resented by Ugo Scuro, lawyer.

The applicants claim that the Court should:

— annul

in its entirety Commission Regulation (EC)
No 1019/2002 of 13 June 2002 on marketing standards
for olive oil, alternatively Articles 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 thereof.

28.9.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 233/33

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicants, being the President of AIFO (Associazione
Italiana Frantoiani Oleari) and that association itself, seek
annulment of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1019/2002 of
13 June 2002 on marketing standards for olive oil (1).

their claims,

In support of
they plead infringement of
Article 33, the second subparagraph of Article 34(2) and
Articles 153, 157 and 253 of the EC Treaty. They maintain
the contested regulation favours the
in that regard that
maintenance of the dominant positions occupied by large
undertakings in the sector concerned, thereby impeding the
development of small and medium-sized undertakings, and
that it does not provide consumers with guarantees as to the
provenance and authenticity of the product. In particular, the
regulation provides that the labelling is to bear information on
the category of olive oil concerned, but that information is
inadequate to guarantee the intrinsic quality of the product.
More specifically, it provides that the designation of origin of
virgin and extra virgin olive oils is to be purely optional,
whereas, for consumers, the geographical origin of the raw
materials is invariably a point of major importance. The
regulation requires the product to be presented to the final
consumer in packaging of a maximum capacity of five litres,
to the prejudice of small operators such as pressers, who
generally sell the product in bulk on the spot.

Moreover, the contested regulation does not provide adequate
guarantees as to the provenance and authenticity of the
product, thus impeding the marketing of types of oil which
are of higher quality and are more susceptible to direct control
by the consumer, such as that sold directly by the presser.

From another standpoint, and contrary to the objective of
the common agricultural policy,
the contested regulation
discourages the distribution of high-quality olive oil such as
that marketed directly by pressers, and acts as a disincentive
to productivity, technical progress and rational agricultural
development.

( 1) OJ L 155 of 14.6.2002, p. 27.

Action brought on 2 August 2002 by Kharis Alexandratos
and Maria Panagiotou against the Council of the European
Union

(Case T-233/02)

(2002/C 233/58)

(Language of the Case: Greek)

An action against the Council of the European Union was
brought before the Court of First Instance of the European

Communities on 2 August 2002 by Kharis Alexandratos
and Maria Panagiotou, resident in Brussels, represented by
K. Tagaras, Lawyer, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicants claim that the Court should:

— allow the application;

— annul the contested measures so that the defendant is
obliged to allow the applicants to sit the oral tests;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

This is an action challenging the decision of the selection
board for Council Open Competition A/393 to award the
applicants a fail mark in one of the written tests and not to
allow them to sit the oral tests.

The applicants plead infringement of the first paragraph of
Article 27 of the Staff Regulations and of the principle of equal
treatment. They contend that the infringement is aggravated
by the defendant’s refusal to grant requests made by them
seeking information concerning the guidelines and criteria for
marking their papers and comparing them with those of the
successful candidates.

Furthermore, in the applicants’ submission that refusal renders
the contested measures liable to annulment also by reason of
breach of the duty to state reasons for measures adversely
affecting them and of the principle of transparency in conjunc-
tion with Article 255 EC concerning access to documents.

Action brought on 5 August 2002 by Strongline A/S
against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market

(Case T-235/02)

(2002/C 233/59)

(Language of the case: English)

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 5 August 2002 by Strongline A/S,
represented by Mr Jacob S. Ørndrup at Gorrissen, Federspiel,
Kierkegaard in Copenhagen, Denmark.