Case T-260/04: Action brought on 23 June 2004 by CESTAS (Centro di Educazione Sanitaria e Technologie Appropriate Sanitarie) against the Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2004-08-28
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, Guinea, action for annulment (EU), expenditure, living conditions, non-governmental organisation, redemption

C 217/36

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

28.8.2004

Action brought on 23 June 2004 by CESTAS (Centro di
Educazione Sanitaria e Technologie Appropriate Sanitarie)
against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-260/04)

(2004/C 217/64)

— infringement of the principles of the right to be heard and
of proper administration. In the latter respect, it is noted in
particular that the examination of the applicant's alleged
deficits was wholly carried out by an external body, Ernst &
Young, which was not entirely a third party as regards the
main parties, but a body paid by the Guinean Government
and, as such, cannot be regarded as impartial.

(Language of the case: Italian)

(1) OJ L 145 of 31.05.2001, p. 43.

An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 23 June 2004 by CESTAS (Centro
di Educazione Sanitaria e Technologie Appropriate) (Centre for
Health Education and Appropriate Health Technologies), repre-
sented by Nicoletta Amadei and Charles Turk, lawyers.

The applicants claim that the Court should:

— annul the contested decision in its entirety;

Action brought on 1 July 2004 by the Kingdom of Spain v
the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-266/04)

(2004/C 217/65)

— order the Commission to pay the costs.

(Language of the case: Spain)

Pleas in law and main arguments:

This action seeks the annulment of the decision of the Commis-
sion (Republic of Guinea delegation) of 21 April 2004 under
which the applicant, an NGO operating in Guinea since 1987,
was ordered to pay the sum of 959 543 835 Guinean francs
(equivalent to EUR 397 126.02) as costs considered unjustified
in the carrying out of projects for which it is responsible.

An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities was brought before the Court of First Instance on 1 July
2004 by the Kingdom of Spain, with an address for service at
the Spanish Embassy, 4-6 Boulevard Emmanuel Servais, Luxem-
bourg, represented by Fernando Díez Moreno, lawyer, acting as
Agent.

In support of its claims, the applicant argues:

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— infringement of

requirements

for
essential procedural
failure adequately to state reasons, contradictory reasons
and lack of legal basis. It is claimed that the contested debit
note refers only to the agreement ‘Amélioration des condi-
tions de vie à l'intérieur du pays (“Improvement of living
conditions within the country”) – 7 ACP GUI 019-4-AT
CESTAS’, when no agreement with that name exists, which
is why it is not clear to which agreement or agreements set
up between the applicant and the Guinean government the
contested decision refers. On the other hand, CESTAS notes
the absence of any legal basis whatsoever on which the
contested decision might rest. Finally, the debit note gives
no explanation of the accounting standards by which the
Commission determined the sum in dispute;

— Annul

the Commission decision of 29 April 2004 as
in respect of Spain, the exclusion from financial
regards,
compensation for withdrawal of
fruit and vegetables
(EUR 5 253 604.00); and the exclusion in respect of the
arable crops sector and cattle premiums, with the exception
of the sum relating to the 2000/2001 marketing year in La
Rioja, in the arable crops sector (EUR 1 659 053.00), and

— Order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

— it would also seem possible for the contested decision to be
annulled inasmuch as the order for the applicant to pay the
sum in question was made by the Commission, which is a
third party to the contracts signed in the various projects in
Guinea;

— infringement of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 regarding
public access to European Parliament, Council and Commis-
sion documents (1),
insofar as no action was taken in
respect of the applicant's request to obtain a copy of the
Ernst & Young report on which the contested decision is
based;

— infringement of the defendant's rights of defence;

The contested decision,
in so far as it affects the applicant,
involves four exclusions: (a) financial compensation for with-
drawals of fruit and vegetables; (b) aid for the processing of
lemons; (c) supplies of foodstuffs deriving from intervention
stocks, intended for distribution to persons most in need; and
(d) arable crops and cattle premiums. The present action relates
only to the exclusion from financial compensation relating to
withdrawals of fruit and vegetables (EUR 5 253 601, because
of allegedly defective controls in Murcia and Valencia), and to
the exclusion applied in relation to arable crops and cattle
premiums, with the exception of the sum corresponding to the
marketing year 2000/2001 in La Rioja in respect of arable
crops, as a result of which the sum of which the exclusion is
considered inappropriate in that sector is EUR 1 659 053.