Case T-178/05: Action brought on 5 May 2005 by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland against the Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2005-06-25
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, Northern Ireland, United Kingdom, action for annulment (EU), greenhouse gas, reduction of gas emissions, tradeable emission permit

C 155/30

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

25.6.2005

Action brought on 6 May 2005 by the Republic of Finland
against the Commission of the European Communities

its application within the meaning of the second paragraph of
Article 230 EC

(Case T-177/05)

(2005/C 155/57)

(Language of the case: Finnish)

— by refusing, contrary to the principle of loyal cooperation
under Article 10 EC and to the case-law of the Court of
Justice concerning conditional payment, to enter into nego-
tiations on the conditional payment demanded by the
Commission from Finland on the basis of Regulation (EC,
Euratom) No 1150/2000, in the infringement proceedings
2003/2180, of retroactive customs duties and interest for
late payment accrued thereon up to the date of payment,
and

— by not stating reasons for its refusal, contrary to Article

253 EC.

An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 6 May 2005 by the Republic of
Finland,
and Alice
Guimaraes-Purokoski, Deputy Agent.

represented by Tuula Pynnä, Agent,

The applicant claims that the Court should:

1. annul the Commission's decision contained in the letter of
the Director-General of the Commission's Budget Directo-
rate-General to Finland's Permanent Representative to the
European Union dated 28 February 2005 and the letter of
the Director-General of the Commission's Budget Directo-
rate-General to Finland's Permanent Representative to the
European Union dated 25 April 2005 confirming that deci-
sion, by which the Commission refused to enter into nego-
tiations with Finland on the conditional payment demanded
by the Commission from Finland,
in the infringement
proceedings 2003/2180 brought pursuant to Article 226
EC, of retroactive customs duties and interest
for late
payment accrued thereon up to the date of payment;

2. order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The Director-General of the Commission's Budget Directorate-
General Mr Romero sent Finland's Permanent Representative to
the European Union a letter dated 28 February 2005. In the
letter the Commission states that it refuses to enter into nego-
tiations on the conditional payment demanded by the Commis-
sion from Finland on the basis of Regulation (EC, Euratom) No
1150/2000, (1)
in the infringement proceedings 2003/2180
brought pursuant to Article 226 EC, of retroactive customs
duties and interest for late payment accrued thereon up to the
date of payment. The Commission confirmed that decision in
the letter of the Director-General of the Commission's Budget
Directorate-General to Finland's Permanent Representative to
the European Union dated 25 April 2005.

Finland considers that in making the contested decision the
Commission infringed the EC Treaty or rules of law relating to

The refusal of negotiations has the result that Finland cannot
pay conditionally the retroactive customs duties and interest for
late payment demanded by the Commission from Finland on
the basis of Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1150/2000 in the
infringement proceedings 2003/2180, at
time
ensuring that the points of law at issue in the infringement
proceedings 2003/2180 are brought before the Court of
Justice.

same

the

(1) Council Rgulation (EC, Euratom) No 1150/2000 of 22 May 2000
implementing Decision 94/728/EC, Euratom on the system of the
Communities' own resources, OJ L 130 of 31.5.2000, p. 1.

Action brought on 5 May 2005 by the United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Northern Ireland against the Commis-
sion of the European Communities

(Case T-178/05)

(2005/C 155/58)

(Language of the case: English)

An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 5 May 2005 by the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, represented by
C. Jackson, agent, assisted by M. Hoskins, Barrister.

25.6.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 155/31

The applicant claims that the Court should:

the decision challenged, given the express terms of the
national allocation plan;

— join this application with the application lodged by the
United Kingdom on 11 April 2005 pursuant to Article 230
EC seeking annulment of
the
amended NAP contained in the Commissions's letter of 1
February 2005;

to consider

the refusal

— the Commission was obliged to consider the United King-
dom's amendments to the national allocation plan as soon
as possible in order to enable the United Kingdom to
comply with its obligations under the Directive;

— annul Commission Decision C(2005) 1081 final dated 12
April 2005 concerning the proposed amendment to the
national allocation plan for the allocation of greenhouse gas
emission allowances notified by the United Kingdom in
accordance with Directive 2003/87/EC of
the European
Parliament and of the Council; and

— the Commission's Decision C(2004)2515/4 final cannot
prevent or restrict the consideration of the comments of
the public required by point 9 of Annex III and Article
11(1) of the Directive, and a Member State must remain
free to propose any amendments necessary,
following
public consultation;

— order the Commission to pay the United Kingdom's costs of

this action.

— Article 3 of

the Commission's Decision C(2004)2515/4
final permits the United Kingdom to notify any amendment
to the Commission, including amendments resulting in an
increase to the quantity of allowances allocated.

Pleas in law and main arguments

(1) OJ L 275 of 25 October 2003, p. 32.

On 30 April 2004, the United Kingdom notified a provisional
national allocation plan to the Commission pursuant to Direc-
the
tive 2003/87/EC of
Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for green-
house gas emission allowance trading within the Community
and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC (1).

the European Parliament and of

On 7 July 2004,
the Commission adopted Decision
C(2004)2515/4 final concerning the United Kingdom's national
allocation plan under Article 9(3) of the Directive.

Following the completion of the activities identified in the
provisional national allocation plan, the United Kingdom noti-
fied the Commission on 10 November 2004 that it wished to
amend the provisional national allocation plan to take account
of the results of this work.

By the challenged decision, the Commission found that the
proposed amendment to the national allocation plan notified
by the United Kingdom to the Commission on 10 November
2004 and last up-dated on 18 February 2005 implying an
increase of
the emission allowance allocations by 19.8 Mt
CO2eq was inadmissible.

The United Kingdom submits that this finding of inadmissibility
is wrong as a matter of law and should be annulled.

The United Kingdom contends that the challenged decision is
wrong as a matter of law on the following grounds:

— the Commission was not entitled to treat the United King-
dom's provisional national allocation plan as definitive in

Action brought on 6 May 2005 by Stradeblu s.r.l. against
the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-179/05)

(2005/C 155/59)

(Language of the case: Italian)

An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 6 May 2005 by Stradeblu s.r.l.
established in Cagliari, represented by Alberto M. Rossi, lawyer,
for annulment of Decision 2005/163/EC of 16 March 2004 on
the State aid paid by Italy to the Adriatica, Caremar, Siremar,
Saremar and Toremar shipping companies (Tirrenia Group),
and particularly Article 1 thereof, which provides that ‘without
prejudice to the provisions of paragraph 2, the aid granted by Italy to
Adriatica as of 1 January 1992 as compensation for providing a
public service is compatible with the common market having regard to
Article 86(2) of the Treaty’.