Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 3 February 2005 in Case T-19/01 Chiquita Brands International, Inc., and Others v Commission of the European Communities (Common organisation of the markets — Bananas — Action for compensation — Regulation No 2362/98 — Agreement establishing the WTO and annexed agreements — Recommendations and rulings of the dispute settlement body of the WTO)
Date: 2005-04-16
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, appeal to the Court (EU), distributive trades, import licence, tariff quota, tropical fruit

C 93/24

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

16.4.2005

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 3 February 2005

of 3 February 2005

in Case T-19/01 Chiquita Brands International, Inc., and
Others v Commission of the European Communities (1)

in Case T-139/01 Comafrica SpA and Dole Fresh Fruit
Europe Ltd & Co v Commission of the European Commu-
nities (1)

(Common organisation of the markets — Bananas — Action
for compensation — Regulation No 2362/98 — Agreement
establishing the WTO and annexed agreements — Recom-
mendations and rulings of the dispute settlement body of the
WTO)

(Common organisation of
the markets — Bananas —
Imports from ACP States and third countries — Regulation
(EC) No 896/2001 — Regulation (EC) No 1121/2001 —
Action for annulment — Admissibility — Person individually
concerned — Action for damages)

(2005/C 93/47)

(Language of the case: English)

(2005/C 93/48)

(Language of the case: English)

In Case T-19/01: Chiquita Brands International, Inc., established
in Trenton, New Jersey (United States), Chiquita Banana Co.
BV, established in Breda (Netherlands), and Chiquita Italia, SpA,
established in Rome (Italy), represented by C. Pouncey, solicitor,
and L. Van Den Hende, avocat, with an address for service in
the Commission of
Luxembourg,
the European
against
Communities, (Agents:
initially C. Van der Hauwaert and C.
Brown, then L. Visaggio, C. Brown and M. Niejahr, and finally
L. Visaggio and C. Brown, assisted by N. Khan, barrister, with
an address for service in Luxembourg), — action for compensa-
tion in respect of loss allegedly suffered by reason of the adop-
tion and maintaining in force of Commission Regulation (EC)
No 2362/98 of 28 October 1998, laying down detailed rules
for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 404/93
regarding imports of bananas into the Community (OJ 1998 L
293, p. 32), — the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber,
Extended Composition), composed of P. Lindh, President,
R. García-Valdecasas, J.D. Cooke, P. Mengozzi and M.E. Martins
Ribeiro,
J. Plingers, Administrator, for the Registrar,
gave a judgment on 3 February 2005, in which it:

Judges;

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the applicant

to pay its own costs and those of

the

Commission.

In Case T-139/01: Comafrica SpA, established in Genoa (Italy)
and Dole Fresh Fruit Europe Ltd & Co., established in Hamburg
(Germany), represented by B. O'Connor, Solicitor, and P. Bastos-
Martin, Barrister, supported by Simba SpA, established in Milan
(Italy), represented by S. Carbone and F. Munari,
lawyers,
against
the European Communities,
the Commission of
initially L. Visaggio, M. Niejahr and K. Fitch, and
(Agents:
subsequently L. Visaggio and K. Fitch, with an address for
service in Luxembourg), supported by the Kingdom of Spain,
(Agents:
initially R. Silva de Lapuerta, and subsequently L.
Fraguas Gadea, with an address for service in Luxembourg) —
action, first, for annulment of Commission Regulation (EC) No
896/2001 of 7 May 2001 laying down detailed rules for
applying Council Regulation (EEC) No 404/93 as regards the
arrangements for importing bananas into the Community (OJ
2001 L 126, p. 6), and of Commission Regulation (EC) No
1121/2001 of 7 June 2001 fixing the adjustment coefficients
to be applied to each traditional operator's reference quantity
under the tariff quotas for imports of bananas (OJ 2001 L 153,
p. 12), and, second, an action for compensation for damage
allegedly caused to the applicants by the adoption of Regula-
tions No 896/2001 and No 1121/2001 — the Court of First
Instance (Fifth Chamber), composed of P. Lindh, President, R.
García-Valdecasas and J.D. Cooke, Judges; J. Plingers, Adminis-
trator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 3 February
2005, in which it:

(1) OJ C 108 of 7.4.2001.

1. Dismisses as inadmissible the claim for annulment;

2. Dismisses as unfounded the claim for compensation;