Case T-221/07: Action brought on 26 June 2007 — Republic of Hungary v Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2007-06-26
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: Hungary, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, greenhouse gas, national planning, principle of proportionality, reduction of gas emissions

25.8.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 199/41

Action brought on 26 June 2007 — Republic of Hungary v
Commission of the European Communities

sion did not take into account the additional information which
was supplied by the applicant and which the Commission itself
had requested during the procedure.

(Case T-221/07)

(2007/C 199/77)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Parties

Applicant: Republic of Hungary (represented by:
Agent)

J. Fazekas,

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

— Annul the Commission Decision of 16 April 2007 on the
national plan for the allocation of greenhouse gas emission
allowances notified by Hungary in accordance with Directive
2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council
(C 2007 1689 final)

— Order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant contests the validity of Commission Decision of
16 April 2007 on the national plan for the allocation of green-
house gas emission allowances notified by Hungary in accord-
ance with Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament
and of the Council (1). According to the contested decision, the
national allocation plan of Hungary does not meet certain
criteria laid down in Annex III to Directive 2003/87.

The legal basis of the action brought by the applicant is that
Directive 2003/87, and in particular Article 9(3), does not grant
to the Commission itself
the power to determine, without
taking any account of either the allocation plans developed and
notified by the Member States under Article 9(1)
and
Article 11(2) of the directive or the total quantity of emission
allowances to be allocated as established by the Member States
in those plans. the total quantity of emission allowances which
the Member States may allocate

that power

to the Commission,

In the event that the Court holds that the Directive 2003/87
does grant
the applicant
submits that the Commission made a manifest error of assess-
ment in evaluating the total quantity of emission allowances to
be allocated in accordance with the national allocation plan.
Hungary states that the Commission, in its assessment, first, did
not take into account the data and calculations presented in the
allocation plan, and thus infringed the principle of proportion-
ality, and secondly, made use of manifestly incorrect data and
inappropriate calculations which led necessarily to an incorrect
determination of the total quantity.

states

the applicant

Lastly,
the Commission did not
that
adequately comply with its obligation to state reasons, given
that, first, the Commission did not properly set out the reasons
why it did not take into consideration the allocation plan noti-
fied by Hungary and the data and calculations presented in that
plan; secondly, the Commission did not properly set out the
reasons for the suitability of the data and calculations which it
did use; and thirdly, the Commission did not state any reason
information
why it did not take into account the additional
supplied by Hungary and which the Commission itself had
requested in the course of the procedure.

(1) Directive 2003/87/EC of

the
Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse
gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending
Council Directive 96/61/EC (OJ 2003 L 275, p. 32).

the European Parliament and of

Appeal brought on 25 June 2007 by Petrus Kerstens
against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal made on
25 April 2007 in Case F-59/06, Kerstens v Commission

(Case T-222/07 P)

(2007/C 199/78)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Petrus J. F. Kerstens (Overijse, Belgium) (represented
by C. Mourato, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of
Communities

the European

Form of order sought by the appellant

— annul the contested order;

— refer the case back to the Civil Service Tribunal before

another chamber;

— award costs as of right.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant also claims that in the course of the procedure,
the Commission infringed the principle of fair cooperation, in
that, first, the Commission determined the method of calcula-
tion and the data to be used to establish the total quantity of
emission allowances without consulting the Member States
(including Hungary) on the subject, and secondly, the Commis-

In his appeal, the applicant seeks the annulment of the order of
the Civil Service Tribunal dismissing as clearly inadmissible the
action whereby he sought the annulment of, first, his career
development report for 2004 and, second, the decision of the
appointing authority rejecting his complaint against that career
development report.