Case T-485/04: Action brought on 10 December 2004 by Association Coopération des Bibliothèques de Bretagne (COBB) against Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2005-03-05
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: Brittany, EU financing arrangements, European Commission, European Regional Development Fund, action for annulment (EU), eligibility criteria, eligible region, library

C 57/32

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

5.3.2005

Action brought on 10 December 2004 by Association
Coopération des Bibliothèques de Bretagne (COBB) against
Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-485/04)

(2005/C 57/54)

(Language of the case: French)

An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 10 December 2004 by the Associa-
tion Coopération des Bibliothèques de Bretagne (COBB), estab-
lished in Rennes (France), represented by J.-P. Martin, lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the subparagraph concerning the COBB of Decision
No 1116 dated 9 December 2003 of the Commission of
the European Communities.

Pleas in law and main arguments

the Commission's decision which
This action is against
excluded the operation ‘Réseau des périodiques de Bretagne,
année 1999’ (Brittany Periodicals Network 1999), for which the
applicant had applied for a subsidy from the ERDF,
from
expenditure eligible under the Programme Objectif 5b Bretagne
1994-1999 (Programme Objective 5b Brittany 1994-1999).

The applicant sought that financing under a programme of
rural and costal development entitled ‘Morgane 2’, which was
implemented for the Brittany Region, in respect of Objective
5b for the period 1994-1999. That programme describes all
the action eligible for European financing, of which Action
215, which comes within Priority Axis A aimed at mobilising
the employment market and, more particularly, within Measure
2 aimed at improving the competitiveness of businesses, by
developing remote working and access to teleservices.

In concrete terms, the operation ‘Brittany Periodicals Network’
consists of putting in place, thanks to a network of establish-
ments, a hardware and software infrastructure managing a data-
base made up of articles from periodicals and studies covering
in order to make high-quality information on that
Brittany,
region accessible, via the Internet,
to all decision-makers
(elected representatives, heads of undertakings, etc.). Its aim is
to support and raise the quality of information and decision of
the economic decision-makers with a view to greater competi-
tiveness of undertakings.

It was only after two agreements granting subsidy had been
signed, that the Region's Prefecture notified the applicant of the
contested decision.

In support of its claims, the applicant relies on three pleas in
law. The first concerns a mistake in the statement of reasons,
the second brings together arguments alleging breach of the
principle of the protection of legitimate expectations and the
third alleges breach of the duty to state reasons.

The applicant submits in that regard that:

— contrary to the defendant's statement, the applicant is estab-
lished in an eligible area, since there is no requirement in
Action 215, Axis A concerning the recipient's registered
office, and, since, in this case, the area concerned covers the
whole of Area 5b, that is to say, ‘the rural and costal world’
of Brittany. Also, Action 215 lists
individually the
‘economic development associations and bodies’, which
shows that the two expressions cannot be mistaken;

— the agreement granting subsidy signed between the appli-
cant and the Prefecture on 31 December 2001 contained
precise assurances which gave rise in the applicant's mind
to expectations based on the continuity of the operation in
question. Further, a European Union subsidy of EUR 10 976
was actually paid to the applicant in March 2002 under
Programme 5b;

— the applicable Community legislation makes no reference
either to possible withdrawal of a subsidy or to a demand
for repayment thereof under the ERDF;

— the decision complained of confines itself to a gap-filling
reference to the reservation issued by the Commission inter-
ministérielle de coordination des contrôles (the Interminis-
terial Commission for Coordination of Controls), but
contains no reasoned or sufficient explanation enabling the
reasons why the Commission held the operation in ques-
tion to be ineligible to be understood.

Action brought on 13 December 2004 by Christos Michail
against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-486/04)

(2005/C 57/55)

(Language of the case: French)

An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 13 December 2004 by Christos
Michail, residing in Brussels (Belgium), represented by Hara-
lambos Meidanis, lawyer.