Case T-363/05: Action brought on  21 September 2005  — COFRA s.r.l. v Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2005-11-26
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, Italy, State aid, action for annulment (EU), control of State aid

C 296/34

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

26.11.2005

In support of its claims, the applicant argues that the Commis-
sion:

Form of order sought

— by having failed to initiate the formal investigation proce-
dure when, once it had received the Italian Government's
proposal for reformulation of the applications in respect of
the third invitation to tender under the previous scheme, it
incompatible with the common
considered that proposal
market, has infringed Article 88(2) of the Treaty and the
principle of protection of the right to a fair hearing;

— has breached the principle of legal certainty;

— has committed an error of assessment.

According to the applicant, by making the compatibility with
the common market of the proposal to allow undertakings
taking part in the third tender procedure to reformulate their
tender and by concluding, without the least discussion with the
parties concerned,
the
Commission has altered its decision to approve the 1997
scheme, which presupposed a previous investigation under
Article 87 of the Treaty.

the proposal was incompatible,

that

The applicant claims, subject to all procedural reservations, that
the Court should declare that, by having acted unlawfully as set
out in the application, the Commission has seriously and mani-
festly infringed Community law, and has caused the applicant
financial damage and must therefore be ordered to pay the
applicant compensation:

(a) of EUR 387 700,00,

revalued in accordance with the
ISTAT (Italian Central Statistical Office) indices of 26 June
2001 until the date of judgment;

(b) of EUR 387 700,00,

revalued in accordance with the
ISTAT indices of 26 June 2002 until the date of judgment;

(c) of EUR 387 700,00,

revalued in accordance with the
ISTAT indices of 26 June 2003 until the date of judgment;

(d) interest on those revalued sums,

and that the Court should order the defendant to pay the costs,
including those of the party's technical consultancy.

Furthermore, the applicant alleges that, by affecting and putting
an end to pre-existing legal situations, the defendant has in fact
revoked the authorisation decision of 1997, without observing
the procedural guarantees provided by Regulation EC No
659/99 for cases of revocation of aid.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are those put forward in
Case T-362/05 Nuova Agricast v Commission.

(1) Order of the Court of First Instance of 8 June 2005, not published.
(2) Order of the Court of First

Instance of 8 June 2005, not yet

published in the ECR.

(3) Order of the Court of First Instance of 15 June 2005, not published.

Action brought on 26 September 2005 — Austria v
Commission

Action brought on 21 September 2005 — COFRA s.r.l. v
Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-368/05)

(2005/C 296/71)

Language of the case: German

(Case T-363/05)

(2005/C 296/70)

Parties

Applicant(s): Republic of Austria (represented by: H. Dossi)

Language of the case: Italian

Defendant(s): Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

Parties

The applicant(s) claim(s) that the Court should:

Applicant(s): COFRA s.r.l.
Michele Arcangelo Calabrese, lawyer)

(Barletta (Italy))

(represented by

Defendant(s): Commission of the European Communities

— annul Commission Decision C(2005)2685 of 15 July 2005
excluding from Community financing certain expenditure
incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section
of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund
(EAGGF), and order the Commission to bear the costs of
the proceedings;