Case C-445/07 P: Appeal brought on 28 September 2007 by the Commission of the European Communities against the judgment delivered on 18 July 2007 in Case T-189/02 Ente per le Ville Vesuviane v Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2007-12-08
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, appeal, financial aid, heritage protection, regional policy

8.12.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 297/25

the European Communities against

Appeal brought on 28 September 2007 by the Commission
of
the judgment
delivered on 18 July 2007 in Case T-189/02 Ente per le
European
Ville Vesuviane

the

of

v Commission
Communities

(Case C-445/07 P)

(2007/C 297/40)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Appellant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: L. Flynn, Agent, assisted by A. Dal Ferro, avvocato)

Other party to the proceedings: Ente per le Ville Vesuviane

Form of order sought

— set aside the judgment delivered on 18 July 2007 in Case
T-189/02 in so far as it declares that the action for annul-
ment brought by the Ente per le Ville Vesuviane is admis-
sible;

— declare that the action for annulment brought by the Ente
against Commission Decision

le Ville Vesuviane
per
D(2002) 810111 is inadmissible;

— order the Ente per le Ville Vesuviane to pay the costs of the
present proceedings and of the proceedings at first instance.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The Commission considers its own challenge against the judg-
ment of the Court of First Instance admissible since, although it
won the case at first instance as to the substance, it was unsuc-
cessful regarding the plea of inadmissibility against the Ente per
le Ville Vesuviane.

According to the applicant, the judgment under appeal is defec-
tive because it infringes Community law, in so far as it declared
the action brought by the Ente per le Ville Vesuviane admissible,
taking the view that
the latter was directly concerned as
provided for in the fourth paragraph of Article 230 EC. The
applicant argues that according to current Community law,
where, as in the present case, there is an act addressed to a
Member State which is given discretion as to whether the effects
of the act will have repercussions on the applicant, the decision
in question cannot be considered to be of direct concern to the
latter, irrespective of whether or not the applicant was a ‘benefi-
ciary’ of Community funds.

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

(Case C-447/07)

(2007/C 297/41)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

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

Defendant: Italian Republic

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— declare that, by laying down in its legislation that Italian citi-
zenship is required for the posts of master or first officer
(second-in-command) on all vessels flying the Italian flag,
the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under
Article 39 EC;

— order the Italian Republic to pay the costs of the proceed-

ings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The Commission claims that the Italian legislation laying down
that Italian citizenship is required for the posts of master or
second-in-command on all vessels flying the Italian flag does
not comply with Article 39 EC, which enshrines the principle of
freedom of movement for workers, as interpreted by the Court.

In two cases concerning, respectively, the posts of master and
second-in-command of merchant ships flying the Spanish flag
(Case C-405/01) and the post of master of vessels engaged in
small-scale maritime shipping (‘Kleine Seeschifffahrt’), and in the
specific case of German-flagged fishing vessels carrying on
small-scale maritime fishing (Case C-47/02), the Court made
clear, in its judgments of 30 September 2003, the proper inter-
pretation of Article 39 EC.

The Commission observes that,
in the course of the present
procedure, the Italian authorities have not put forward any argu-
ments which differ from those put forward at the time in Case
C-405/01 (in which the Italian Republic intervened) or those
which the French authorities supported in Case C-47/02. Those
arguments were rejected by the Court
in its judgments of
30 September 2003.