Case C-46/07: Action brought on 1 February 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic
Date: 2007-04-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Italy, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, pension scheme, retirement conditions, rights of civil servants

C 82/20

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

14.4.2007

The Commission submits that, since the adoption of Regulation
No 725/2004, the Community has had exclusive competence
with regard to entering into international obligations in the field
of maritime security. Consequently,
the Member States no
longer have the power to present national views to the Interna-
tional Maritime Organisation on matters which fall within exclu-
sive Community competence, unless they receive such authorisa-
tion from the Community.

(1) OJ L 129, 29.4.2004, p. 6.

Appeal brought on 2 February 2007 by Masdar (UK) Ltd
against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth
Chamber) delivered on 16 November 2006 in Case T-333/
03: Masdar (UK) Ltd v The Commission of the European
Communities

(Case C-47/07 P)

(2007/C 82/37)

Language of the case: English

Action brought on 1 February 2007 — Commission of the
European Communities v Italian Republic

(Case C-46/07)

(2007/C 82/36)

Parties

Appellant: Masdar (UK) Ltd (represented by: A. Bentley and P.
Green, Barristers)

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of
Communities

the European

Form of order sought

Language of the case: Italian

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: L. Pignataro-Nolin and M. van Beek, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Italian Republic

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— declare that, by maintaining in force a provision by which
public employees are entitled to receive the old-age pension
at different ages depending on whether they are male or
female, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations
under Article 141 EC;

— order the Italian Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The Commission claims that the pension scheme managed by
INPDAP (National Provident Institution for the Employees of
is a discriminatory occupational scheme
Public Authorities)
contrary to Article 141 EC, since it provides that the general
pensionable age for men is 65 and for women 60.

— set aside in its entirety the judgment of the Court of First
Instance of 16 November 2006 in Case T-333/03, MASDAR
(U.K) Ltd. v Commission of the European Communities.

— order the Commission to pay to the Applicant:

(i) The sum of EUR 448,947.78 claimed by the Appellant
in Case T-333/03, or
sum of
EUR 249,314.35 or such other sum as the Court
considers appropriate; and

failing

this,

the

(ii) Interest on the amount in (i);

— order the Commission to pay the costs of

the present
proceedings and of the proceedings before the Court of First
Instance.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The Appellant submits that the judgment of the Court of First
Instance (‘CFI’) should be set aside on the following grounds:

1. The CFI erred in law when it characterised the Appellant as
merely having acted pursuant to its contractual obligations
towards Helmico, as a result of which the CFI dismissed the
Appellant's claims founded on unjust enrichment and nego-
tiorum gestio. In doing so, the CFI failed to have regard to the
Appellant's entitlement to terminate the sub-contracts as at 2
October 1998.

2. Irrespective of whether the Appellant acted pursuant to a
contractual obligation towards Helmico or not, the CFI erred
in law by failing to take into consideration (i) the fact that
the Commission was not in the position of an ordinary
contractor, but had powers of recovery which it could exer-
cise pursuant to the Financial Regulation of 21 December
1977 applicable to the general budget of
the European
Communities (1) and (ii) how such powers were exercised by
the Commission.