Case C-324/03: Action brought on 24 July 2003 by the Italian Republic against the Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2003-09-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU regional policy, European Commission, Italy, State aid, action for annulment (EU), eligible region, regional aid

20.9.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 226/11

breach of Articles 1 and 3 of Regulation No 881/92 and of
Articles 1 and 6 of Regulation No 3118/93.

Action brought on 25 July 2003 by the Commission of the
European Communities against the Hellenic Republic

(1) OJ 1992 L 95, p. 1.
(2) OJ 1993 L 279, p. 1.

Action brought on 24 July 2003 by the Italian Republic
against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case C-324/03)

(2003/C 226/18)

the Commission of

An action against
the European
Communities was brought before the Court of Justice of the
European Communities on 24 July 2003 by the Italian
Republic, represented by Ivo Maria Braguglia, acting as Agent,
and Avvocato dello Stato Antonio Cingolo.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the memorandum from Commissioner Barnier of
14 May 2003 No 26777, received on 20 May 2003, in so
far as it refuses to accept as eligible for assistance advances
granted in relation to State aid by the Member States after
19 February 2003, and all measures on which it is based
or with which it is connected;

— order the Commission of the European Communities to

pay the costs.

(Case C-326/03)

(2003/C 226/19)

An action against the Hellenic Republic was brought before
the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 25 July
2003 by the Commission of
the European Communities,
represented by M.-J. Jonczy, of its Legal Service.

The Commission claims that the Court should:

— declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary to comply with
Council Directive 99/63/EC of 21 June 1999 concerning
the Agreement on the organisation of working time of
seafarers
the European Shipowners"
Association (ECSA) and the Federation of Transport
Workers" Unions in the European Union (FST) (1), and in
any event by failing to inform the Commission thereof,
the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations
under that directive;

concluded by

— order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period within which the directive had to be transposed
expired on 30 June 2002.

Pleas in law and main arguments

(1) OJ L 167, 2.7.1999, p. 33.

the contested act

is manifestly
The applicant claims that
contrary to Article 32 of Commission Regulation (EC)
No 1260/1999 (1) and Rule No 1, Points 1 and 2 of the
annex to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1685/2000 (2).
According to the applicant, none of the provisions of the
abovementioned regulations assigns significance, for the pur-
poses of eligibility of amounts granted to the final recipient of
the funding by way of State aid, to the activities actually assisted
by the funding itself. On the contrary, the system set out in the
regulations in question gives significance exclusively to pay-
ments actually made by the Member State as final recipient, on
the sole condition that they state exactly the expenditure actu-
ally borne by the final recipient itself.

The applicant also claims that the contested act is unlawful
inasmuch as its statement of reasons is defective and contra-
dictory.

(1) OJ 1999 L 161, p. 1.
(2) OJ 2000 L 193, p. 39.

de

Sala

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunal
Supremo,
lo Contencioso-Administrativo,
division: three by order of that Court of 21 July 2003 in
the case of Colegio de Ingenieros de Caminos, Canales
y Puertos against Administración del Estado, other Party:
G.M. Imo

(Case C-330/03)

(2003/C 226/20)

Justice of

Reference has been made to the Court of
the
European Communities by order of the Tribunal Supremo,
Sala de lo Contencioso-Administrativo, division: three (Supreme
Court, Chamber for Contentious-Administrative Proceedings) of
21 July 2003, received at the Court Registry on 29 July 2003, for
a preliminary ruling in the case of Colegio de Ingenieros de
Caminos, Canales y Puertos against Administración del Estado,
other Party: G. M. Imo on the following questions: