Case T-267/07: Action brought on 9 July 2007 — Italian Republic v Commission
Date: 2007-07-09
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EAGGF Guarantee Section, European Commission, Italy, action for annulment (EU), agricultural expenditure, closing of accounts, guarantee

C 223/12

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

22.9.2007

3. The restriction contained in part A of the Specific Provisions of the
Annex to Directive 2006/133 on the types of crops on which the
use of flusilazole may be authorised by the Member States, namely
is
cereals other
suspended until judgment is delivered in the main proceedings;

than rice, oilseed rape, maize and sugar beet,

4. Costs are reserved.

Action brought on 17 July 2007 — Estonia v Commission

(Case T-263/07)

(2007/C 223/17)

Language of the case: Estonian

Parties

Applicant: Republic of Estonia (represented by Lembit Uibo,
Agent)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

the decision of

the Commission of

Annul
the European
Communities of 4 May 2007 concerning the national green-
house gas allocation plan submitted by Estonia in accordance
with Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of
the Council (1)

— Infringement of Article 175(2)(c) EC,

the
EC Treaty the Commission does not have competence to
adopt measures which significantly affect a Member State's
choice between different energy sources and the general
structure of its energy supply;

since under

— Breach of the principle of good administration, since the
Commission did not take account when taking its decision
of all the essential circumstances present in the individual
case and did not verify whether all the assumptions made
when taking its decision were correct;

— Breach of the obligation to state reasons.

(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 L 275, 25.10.2003, p. 32).

the European Parliament and of

Action brought on 9 July 2007 — Italian Republic v
Commission

(Case T-267/07)

(2007/C 223/18)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant:
Fiorentino, Avvocati dello Stato)

Italian Republic (represented by: G. Aiello and S.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

The Commission's decision of 4 May 2007 concerning the
national greenhouse gas allocation plan submitted by Estonia in
the European
accordance with Directive 2003/87/EC of
Parliament and of
the Council should be annulled on the
following grounds:

— Infringement of Article 9(1) and (3) and Article 11(2) of
Directive 2003/87/EC and the consequent exceeding of
competence;

— Manifest errors of assessment, since the Commission did not
take into account correct information available to it, but
relied on false assumptions which directly and essentially
affected the outcome of
the contested decision and the
determination of the overall amount of emission allowances;

Form of order sought

— annul Commission Decision C(2007) 1901 final of 27 April
2007 on the clearance of the accounts of the paying agen-
cies of Member States concerning expenditure financed by
the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund
(EAGGF), Guarantee Section, for the 2006 financial year, in
so far as it charges to the Italian Republic, as provided for in
Article 32(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005, 50 % of
the financial consequences of the non-recovery of amounts
in the cases of irregularity or negligence under consideration
in the present application.

22.9.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 223/13

Pleas in law and main arguments

Defendants: Council of the European Union and Commission of
the European Communities

The Italian Government has challenged before the Court of First
Instance of the European Communities Commission Decision
C(2007) 1901 final of 27 April 2007, notified on even date, on
the clearance of the accounts of the paying agencies of Member
States concerning expenditure financed by the European Agri-
cultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), Guarantee
Section, for the 2006 financial year, in so far as it charges to the
Italian Republic, as provided for in Article 32(5) of Regulation
(EC) No 1290/2005, 50 % of the financial consequences of the
non-recovery of amounts in particular cases of irregularity or
negligence.

In support of its action the Italian Government complained of
the inclusion in the decision of cases which the Commission
ought to have decided expressly, with diligence and within a
reasonable period, at a earlier time, by charging in full to the
EAGGF. That is also having regard to the fact that, in respect of
several of those positions, the Commission had taken a favour-
able decision.

The Italian Government therefore pleaded the following grounds
of appeal:

(a) infringement and/or misapplication of Article 5(2) of Regu-
lation (EEC) No 595/91 and Article 8 of Regulation (EC)
No 1663/95. Infringement of Article 253 EC in respect of
failure to state the grounds;

(b) infringement and/or misapplication of Article 8(2) of Regu-
lation (EEC) No 729/70 and Article 8(2) of Regulation (EC)
No 1258/99. Infringement of Article 253 EC in respect of
failure to state the grounds;

(c) infringement and/or misapplication of Article 5(2) of Regu-
lation (EEC) No 595/91, Article 8 of Regulation (EC)
No 1663/95, Article 8(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 729/70
and Article 8(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1258/99 (in relation
to the amounts less than EUR 500 000,00). Infringement of
Article 253 EC in respect of failure to state the grounds (in
relation to amounts less than EUR 500 000,00).

Action brought on 19 July 2007 — Agrícola del Sureste v
Council and Commission

(Case T-268/07)

(2007/C 223/19)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: S. Coop. Agrícola del Sureste (Murcia, Spain) (repre-
sented by: L. Ortiz Blanco, lawyer)

Form of order sought

— to uphold the present action for damages,

in accordance
with Article 288 EC, and declare the applicant is entitled to
be financially compensated by the Council and the Commis-
sion jointly and severally in the sum total of one hundred
and forty-two thousand five hundred and eighty five euros
(EUR 142 585);

— order the defendants to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and the main arguments are the same as those
raised in Case T-217/07 Las Palmeras v Council and Commission.

Action brought on 19 July 2007 — Mediterráneo Algodón
v Council and Commission

(Case T-269/07)

(2007/C 223/20)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Mediterráneo Algodón, SA (Sevilla, Spain)
sented by: L. Ortiz Blanco, lawyer)

(repre-

Defendants: Council of the European Union and Commission of
the European Communities

Form of order sought

— to uphold the present action for damages,

in accordance
with Article 288 EC, and declare the applicant is entitled to
be financially compensated by the Council and the Commis-
sion jointly and severally in the sum total of three million
two hundred and seventy-three thousand one hundred and
forty-seven euros (EUR 3 273 147);

— order the defendants to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and the main arguments are the same as those
raised in Case T-217/07 Las Palmeras v Council and Commission.