Case C-254/03 P: Appeal brought on 13 June 2003 by Eduardo Vieira SA against the judgment delivered on 3 April 2003 by the Third Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities in Case T-126/01 between Eduardo Vieira SA and Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2003-08-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Argentina, action for annulment (EU), agreement (EU), balance of payments assistance, fishing agreement, fishing area

2.8.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 184/27

Pleas in law and main arguments

the requirements

The Portuguese authorities failed to take any measures to
intended for
ensure that, within various parameters, water
human consumption met
laid down in
Annex I to Directive 80/778/EEC and, therefore, the Portuguese
Republic has failed to fulfil, within the prescribed period,
its
obligations under Article 7(6) thereof. The fact that the Portu-
guese Republic has or is about
to take steps or measures
which, according to the Portuguese authorities, have as their
main objective to reach the quality levels for water intended
for human consumption laid down by Community law does
not justify that Member State having failed to fulfil its obliga-
tions.

Appeal brought on 13 June 2003 by Eduardo Vieira SA
against the judgment delivered on 3 April 2003 by the
Third Chamber of
the
between
European Communities
the European
Eduardo Vieira SA and Commission of

the Court of First Instance of
in Case T-126/01

Communities

(Case C-254/03 P)

(2003/C 184/48)

the Court of First

An appeal against the judgment delivered on 3 April 2003 by
the Third Chamber of
the
European Communities in Case T-126/01 between Eduardo
Vieira SA and Commission of the European Communities was
brought before the Court of Justice of the European Commu-
nities on 13 June 2003 by Eduardo Vieira S.A., represented by
Ramón García-Gallardo and Mª Dolores Domínguez Pérez,
with an address for service in Luxembourg.

Instance of

The appellant claims that the Court should:

1.

2.

3.

declare the present appeal admissible;

set aside the judgment delivered on 3 April 2003 by the
Third Chamber of
the
in Case T-126/01 between
European Communities
Eduardo Vieira SA and Commission of
the European
Communities;

the Court of First

Instance of

order the European Commission to pay the entire costs of
proceedings before the Court of Justice as well as those
incurred at first instance.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The appellant claims that the Court of First Instance infringed
Community law. The appellant relies on six pleas in law:

— Infringement of the Agreement between the Community
and the Argentinian Republic on relations in the sea

the

so far

sector
the

legal basis of

(EC/Argentina Agreement)

as
fisheries
concerns
contested decision.
According to the Court of First Instance, the Commission
was competent to take Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88 and
in particular on Article 24 thereof as the legal basis for
the EC/
the decision to reduce financial aid. However,
Argentina Agreement lays down a specific legal system
for joint enterprises established within its framework, so
that provisions of general application are not applicable
where the Agreement makes no express reference thereto;
such reference is made only in relation to the submission
of projects for approval and requests and procedure for
payment.

— Infringement of

the EC/Argentina Agreement so far as
concerns the role played by the Joint Committee and the
Instance
Argentinian authorities. The Court of First
required to
considers
consult either the Joint Committee or the Argentinian
authority before reducing financial aid. Thus it disregards
the institutional structure established by the Agreement.

the Commission was not

that

— Infringement of

the EC/Argentina Agreement so far as
concerns application of
the procedure provided for by
Article 44 of Regulation (EEC) No 4028/86, repealed
from 1 January 1994 and thus inapplicable in the present
case, to the procedure for reducing financial aid. Accord-
ingly, there was no legal basis for the consultation with
the Standing Committee for the Fishing Industry.

— Infringement of

the reduction of

the EC/Argentina Agreement so far as
concerns application of Regulation (EC) No 3699/93
the
when assessing the amount of
financial assistance. The Commission ought
to have
applied a reduction based on that regulation but only
within the framework of the EC/Argentina Agreement and
having regard to its scale of assessment. The application
the scale of assessment established in Regulation
of
No 3699/93 entails an additional sanction on the bene-
ficiary.

— Infringement of Community law as regards force majeure.
The Court of First Instance disregards the obligation on
the Commission so far as concerns the legal classification
of certain events as force majeure.

— Infringement of

the EC/Argentina Agreement so far as
concerns the need to seek Commission approval before
leaving Argentinian fishing waters. The Court of First
Instance considers that
the appellant was required to
inform the Commission of difficulties in carrying out the
project and could not
leave the Argentinian exclusive
the
economic zone without
Commission. Nevertheless, if an ‘international component’
is acknowledged to exist, authorisation by the Argentinian
authority should suffice.

approval of

the prior