Case C-332/03: Action brought on 29 July 2003 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Portuguese Republic
Date: 2003-10-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Portugal, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, catch quota, fishery management, fishing rights

4.10.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 239/3

— Infringement of Article 43(3) of the Rules of Procedure
of the Court of First Instance: the applicant submits that
in the present case the appeal was not accepted on the
grounds of alleged failure to observe the period of
confirmation, rather than the procedural time-limit which
was complied with by transmission of the fax.

— Infringement of Article 43(6) of the Rules of Procedure
of the Court of First Instance: the applicant submits, in
accordance with the principle of proportionality, that to
the existing procedural time-limit, extended by ten days
on account of distance, may be added ten additional days
in order to validate an application and a list of annexes
previously sent by fax.

Further, is the use in a bank, as a credit institution, of balances
on a deposit account, funds being placed in that account, as
provided for in Decision 1097/1959 of the Monetary Com-
mittee referred to in this judgment (with the proceeds of
imported foreign currency, and so forth), as deposits in
national currency, convertible into foreign currency, governed
by Article 4 of that same directive, List D and item IX of the
Nomenclature, which reads: ‘Opening and placing of funds on
current or deposit accounts, repatriation or use of balances on
current or deposit accounts with credit institutions’, as that
provision stands according to its spirit and the purpose sought
by that provision?

(1) English special edition: Series I Chapter 1959-1962 p. 49.

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Areiou Pagou
by order of that Court of 31 March 2003 in the case of
Trapeza tis Ellados AE against Banque Artesia

Action brought on 29 July 2003 by the Commission
of the European Communities against the Portuguese
Republic

(Case C-329/03)

(2003/C 239/04)

(Case C-332/03)

(2003/C 239/05)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by order of
the Areiou Pagou
(Supreme Court of Cassation) of 31 March 2003, received at
the Court Registry on 28 July 2003, for a preliminary ruling
in the case of Trapeza tis Ellados AE against Banque Artesia on
the following question:

Are (a) bonds issued by a bank in the form of a limited
company belonging, by virtue of its shares, to the State, with a
maturity of one year from issue which are dealt in on the
money market, where they are quoted, or (b) bonds issued by
a bank in the form of a limited company with a maturity of
one year from issue which are dealt in on the money market,
where they are quoted, governed by Article 4 of the First
Directive of the Council of the European Communities (921/
60) (1), List D and item VI of the Nomenclature, which reads
‘Short-term investments in Treasury bills and other securities
normally dealt in on the money market’, as that provision
stands according to its spirit and the purpose sought or is to
be interpreted under a possible doctrine in international trade
of common experience, to the effect that securities such as
the one-year bonds in ETVA at issue constitute short-term
investments?

An action against the Portuguese Republic was brought before
the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 29 July
2003 by the Commission of the European Communities,
represented by Thomas van Rijn and Ana Maria Alves Vieira,
acting as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

1)

declare that:

— by failing to adopt appropriate rules for the use of
the quotas allocated to it for the fishing years from
1994 to 1996;

— by failing to ensure compliance with Community
legislation in the field of conservation, by means of
sufficient supervision of fishing activities and adqua-
te inspection of the fishing fleet and of the unloading
and recording of catches in the fishing years 1994 to
1996;

C 239/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

4.10.2003

— by failing to impose a provisional prohibition of
fishing on vessels flying its flag or registered in its
territory when the quota allocated to it had been
exhausted, and by having finally prohibited fishing
when its quota had already been greatly exceeded in
the fishing years 1994 to 1996;

— by failing to bring criminal or administrative pro-
ceedings against the captains or any other persons
responsible for overfishing;

— by failing to ensure the effective operation of a
validation system which included cross-checking
and verification of data by means of a computerised
data-base,

the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations
in the sphere of the management and monitoring of
fishing quotas;

2)

order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.

Action brought on 31 July 2003 by Portuguese Republic
against Commission of the European Communities

(Case C-335/03)

(2003/C 239/06)

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of Justice of the European
Communities on 31 July 2003 by the Portuguese Republic,
represented by Luís Fernandes, acting as Agent, and Carlos
Botelho Moniz and Eduardo Maia Cadete, lawyers, with an
address for service in Luxembourg.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Portugal has failed to fulfil completely its Community obli-
gations concerning rules for the use of its catch quotas,
monitoring and inspection, proceedings against the fishermen
in question and the setting-up of a computerised data-base.
During the fishing years 1994 to 1996,
the Portuguese
Republic:

— annul Commission Decision No 2003/364/EC (1) of
15 May 2003 excluding from Community financing
certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under
the Guarantee Section of
the European Agricultural
Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) so far as it
concerns expenditure relating to Portugal;

a)

b)

c)

d)

e)

infringed Article 9(2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No
3760/92 of 20 December 1992 establishing a Com-
munity system for fisheries and aquaculture, which
requires the Member States to adopt rules for the use of
the quotas allocated to them;

— order the defendant institution to pay the costs.

failed to ensure sufficient monitoring of fishing activities
and inspection of the fishing fleet and the unloading and
recording of catches;

Pleas in law and main arguments

infringed Article 21 of Council Regulation (EEC) No
2847/93 which lays down obligations relating to suspen-
sion of fishing;

infringed the obligation to bring criminal or administrat-
ive proceedings against the natural or legal persons
responsible for overfishing;

infringed Article 19(1) and (2) of Regulation No 2847/
93, which requires the Member States to establish a
validation system comprising, in particular, cross-check-
ing and verification of data resulting from those obli-
gations and to create a computerised data-base in which
those data are stored.

— Error in law as a result of the misapplication of Article 6(5)
of Regulation (EEC) No 3887/92. The Portuguese Govern-
ment is of the view that that rule was complied with in
the year in question, since applications for ‘animal’ aid
and the relevant checks must be understood and assessed
from the point of view of the unicity of the holding, that
taken globally ‘animal’ aid schemes as a whole
is,
(rather than each of the schemes independently, as the
Commission appears to maintain). Thus:

— Portugal adopted an approach centring on holdings,
devising an integrated application common to the
various ‘animal’ aid schemes available under the
EAGGF Guarantee section, in the context of which
the checks are carried out. In the year in question,
the minimum percentage of lawful applications were
checked on the spot during the retention period.