Case C-155/07: Action brought on 20 March 2007 — European Parliament v Council of the European Union
Date: 2007-07-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Council of the European Union, EIB loan, European Parliament, appeal to the Court (EU), credit guarantee, developing countries, legal basis

C 155/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

7.7.2007

Action brought on 20 March 2007 — European Parliament
v Council of the European Union

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: A.
Vitro and M. Moore, Agents)

(Case C-155/07)

(2007/C 155/13)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: European Parliament (represented by: R. Passos, A.
Baas and D. Gauci, Agents)

Form of order sought

— Annulment of Council Regulation (EC) No 1968/2006 (1) of
21 December 2006 concerning Community financial contri-
butions to the International Fund for Ireland (2007 to
2010);

— The Council of the European Union to pay the costs.

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M.
Arpio Santacruz, M. Sims and D. Canga Fano, Agents)

Pleas in law and main arguments

Form of order sought

— Annulment, for infringement of the EC Treaty, of Council
Decision 2006/1016/EC (1) of 19 December 2006 granting
a Community guarantee to the European Investment Bank
against losses under loans and loan guarantees for projects
outside the Community

— The Council of the European Union to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The European Parliament relies on one single plea in law in
support of its action, alleging the incorrect choice of legal basis
the contested decision. Since that decision essentially
for
concerns the developing countries among the countries eligible
or potentially eligible for European Investment Bank financing
under Community guarantee, it should have been adopted on
the joint basis of Articles 179 EC and 181a EC, and not solely
on the basis of Article 181a EC, which precludes cooperation
with developing countries from its scope.

(1) OJ 2006 L 414, p. 95.

The European Parliament relies on one plea in law in support of
its action, alleging the incorrect choice of legal basis for the
contested Regulation. Since the measures provided for by that
in respect of
regulation concern Community allocations
economic and social cohesion, they should have been adopted
on the basis of the third paragraph of Article 159 EC and not
on that of Article 308 EC, which can be used only if no other
provision of the Treaty confers on the Community institutions
the necessary power to adopt the act in question.

(1) OJ 2006 L 409, p. 86 and corrigendum — OJ 2007 L 36, p. 31.

a

for

Reference
from the
preliminary
Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 30 March 2007
— Hartlauer Handelsgesellschaft mbH v Wiener
Landesregierung and Oberösterreichische Landesregierung

ruling

(Case C-169/07)

(2007/C 155/15)

Language of the case: German

Action brought on 26 March 2007 — European Parliament
v Council of the European Union

Referring court

(Case C-166/07)

(2007/C 155/14)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Administrative Court)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Hartlauer Handelsgesellschaft mbH

Applicant: European Parliament (represented by: I. Klavina and L.
Visaggio, Agents)

Defendant: Wiener Landesregierung and Oberösterreichische
Landesregierung