Case C-120/06P: Appeal brought on  27 February 2006  by Fabbrica Italiana Accumulatori Motocarri Mentecchio SpA (FIAMM), Fabbrica Italiana Accumulatori Motocarri Montecchio Technologies Inc (FIAMM Technologies) against the judgment delivered on  14 December 2005  in Case T-69/00 Fabbrica Italiana Accumulatori Motocarri Mentecchio SpA (FIAMM), Fabbrica Italiana Accumulatori Motocarri Montecchio Technologies Inc (FIAMM Technologies) v Council of the European Union and Commission of the Euorpean Communities
Date: 2006-05-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Council of the European Union, European Commission, United States, appeal to the Court (EU), customs duties, import policy, indemnification, telecommunications equipment, trade dispute, tropical fruit

C 108/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

6.5.2006

Action brought on 23 February 2006 — Commission of
the European Communities v Federal Republic of
Germany

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Gerda Möllendorf, Christiane Möllendorf

(Case C-109/06)

(2006/C 108/08)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: W. Mölls, Agent)

Defendant: Federal Republic of Germany

Form of order sought

— A declaration that, by not adopting the laws, regulations
and administrative provisions
required to implement
Council Directive 2003/96/EC (1) of 27 October 2003
restructuring the Community framework for the taxation of
energy products and electricity, or,
in any event, by not
communicating these provisions to the Commission, the
Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obliga-
tions under that directive;

Joined Parties: 1. Salem-Abdul Ghani El-Rafei, 2. Dr. Kamal
Rafehi, 3. Ageel A. Al-Ageel

Questions referred

1. Do the provisions of Articles 2(3) and 4(1) of Council Regu-
lation (EC) No 881/2002 of 27 May 2002 (1) prohibit prop-
erty from being conveyed in performance of a sale and
purchase agreement to a natural person listed in Annex I to
that regulation?

2. If Question 1 is to be answered in the affirmative: does
Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 prohibit entry in the land
register necessary for transferring ownership in the property
also when the underlying sale and purchase agreement has
been concluded, and the conveyance declared binding,
before publication of the limitation on disposal in the Offi-
cial Journal of the European Communities, and the contractual
purchase price to be paid by the natural person listed in
Annex I to the regulation, as purchaser, has already been

(a) deposited on the notarial trust account or

(b) paid to the seller?

— An order that the Federal Republic of Germany pay the

costs of the proceedings.

(1) OJ L 139, p. 9.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period for implementing the Directive expired on 31
December 2003.

(1) OJ 2003 L 283, p.51.

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Kammerger-
icht Berlin made on 21 February 2006 in the land registry
case of Gerda Möllendorf, Christiane Möllendorf-Niehuus;
joined parties: 1. Salem -Abdul Ghani El-Rafeil, 2. Dr.
Kamal Rafehi, 3 Ageel A. Al-Ageel

(Case C-117/06)

(2006/C 108/09)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Kammergericht Berlin

Appeal brought on 27 February 2006 by Fabbrica Italiana
Accumulatori Motocarri Mentecchio
SpA (FIAMM),
Fabbrica
Italiana Accumulatori Motocarri Montecchio
Technologies Inc (FIAMM Technologies) against the judg-
ment delivered on 14 December 2005 in Case T-69/00
Fabbrica Italiana Accumulatori Motocarri Mentecchio SpA
(FIAMM),
Italiana Accumulatori Motocarri
Montecchio Technologies Inc (FIAMM Technologies) v
Council of the European Union and Commission of the
Euorpean Communities

Fabbrica

(Case C-120/06P)

(2006/C 108/10)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Appellants: Fabbrica Italiana Accumulatori Motocarri Mentec-
chio SpA (FIAMM), Fabbrica Italiana Accumulatori Motocarri
Montecchio Technologies Inc (FIAMM Technologies)
(repre-
sented by: I. Van Bael, F. Di Gianni and A Cevese, Avvocati)

6.5.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 108/7

Other parties to the proceedings: Council of the European Union
and Commission of the European Communities

Other parties to the proceedings: Commission of the European
Communities and Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

— On the basis that the state of the proceedings so permits,
give a substantive ruling confirming the appellants' entitle-
ment to compensation arising out of the defendants' liabi-
lity for an unlawful act or for a lawful act;

— in any event, order the defendants to pay the costs both of
these proceedings and those before the Court of First
Instance;

— in the alternative, grant the appellants fair compensation as
a result of the unreasonable length of the procedure before
the Court of First Instance;

— grant such further and other relief as fairness might require.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The appellants submit that the judgment under appeal is defec-
tive in that it fails totally to state grounds concerning one of
the principal arguments raised, namely, that in the specific
factual circumstances of the case, the appellants are entitled to
rely on the decision adopted by the Appeal Board of the World
Trade Organisation to establish unlawful conduct on the part
of the Community for the purpose of their claim for compensa-
tion.

— set aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of 14

December 2005;

— on the basis that the state of the proceedings so permits,
give a substantive ruling confirming the appellants' entitle-
ment to compensation arising out of the defendants' liabi-
lity for an unlawful act or for a lawful act;

— in any event, order the defendants to pay the costs both of
these proceedings and those before the Court of First
Instance;

— in the alternative, grant the appellants fair compensation as
a result of the unreasonable length of the procedure before
the Court of First Instance;

— grant such further and other relief as equity might require.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The appellants submit that the judgment under appeal is defec-
tive in that it fails totally to state any grounds concerning one
of the principal arguments raised, namely, that in the specific
factual circumstances of the case, the appellants are entitled to
rely on the decision adopted by the Appeal Board of the World
Trade Organisation to establish unlawful conduct on the part
of the Community for the purposes of their claim for compen-
sation.

Appeal brought on 1 March 2006 by Giorgio Fedon &
Figli SpA and Fedon America Inc. against the judgment
delivered on 14 December 2005 in Case T-135/01 Girogio
Fedon & Figli SpA, Fedon America Inc. v Commission of
the European Communities and Council of the European
Union

Appeal brought on 1 March 2006 by Commission of the
European Communities against the judgment delivered on
15 December 2005 in Case T-33/01 Infront WM AG
(formerly Kirchmedia WM AG) v Commission of the EC

(Case C-121/06 P)

(2006/C 108/11)

Language of the case: Italian

(Case C-125/06 P)

(2006/C 108/12)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Appellants:Girogio Fedon & Figli SpA, Fedon America In. (repre-
sented by: I. Van Bael, A. Cevese, F. Di Gianni and R. Antonini,
Avvocati)

Appellant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: K. Banks and M. Huttunen, Agents)