Case T-94/98: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 26 June 2008 — Alferink and Others v Commission (Actions for damages — Non-contractual liability — Milk — Additional levy — Reference quantity — Producers who entered into non-marketing undertakings — Requirement that production be on the initial SLOM holding — Article 3a of Regulation (EEC) No 1546/88, as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1033/89 — Allegedly ambiguous wording of the applicable provision — Principle of legal certainty)
Date: 2008-06-26
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment (EU), legislation, milk, regulation of agricultural production

C 197/18

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

2.8.2008

In the Sixth and Eighth Chambers sitting with three Judges,
the President of the Chamber will sit with the Judges referred to
at (a), (b) or (c) above in turn, depending on the formation to
which the Judge-Rapporteur belongs. For cases in which the
President of the Chamber is the Judge-Rapporteur, the President
of the Chamber will sit with the Judges of each of those forma-
tions alternately in accordance with the order in which the cases
are registered, subject to the existence of connected cases

Appeal Chamber

On 8 July 2008 the Court of First Instance decided that, for the
the
period from 1 October 2008 to 30 September 2009,
the
the President of
Appeal Chamber will be composed of
Court and, in rotation, two Presidents of Chambers.

The President of the Court of First Instance may derogate
from the rotas on the ground that cases are related or with a
view to ensuring an even spread of the workload.

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 26 June 2008 —
Alferink and Others v Commission

(Case T-94/98) (1)

(Actions for damages — Non-contractual liability — Milk —
Additional
levy — Reference quantity — Producers who
entered into non-marketing undertakings — Requirement that
production be on the initial SLOM holding — Article 3a of
Regulation (EEC) No 1546/88, as amended by Regulation
(EEC) No 1033/89 — Allegedly ambiguous wording of the
applicable provision — Principle of legal certainty)

the Appeal
The Judges who will sit with the President of
Chamber to make up the extended formation of five Judges will
be the three Judges of the formation initially hearing the case
and, in rotation, two Presidents of Chambers.

(2008/C 197/30)

Language of the case: Dutch

Criteria for the assigning of cases to the Chambers

On 8 July 2008 the Court of First Instance laid down the
following criteria for the assignment of cases to the Chambers
for the period from 1 October 2008 to 30 September 2009, in
accordance with Article 12 of the Rules of Procedure:

1. Appeals against the decisions of the Civil Service Tribunal
shall be assigned, as soon as the application has been lodged
and without prejudice to any subsequent application of Arti-
cles 14 and 51 of the Rules of Procedure, to the Appeal
Chamber.

2. Cases other than those referred to in paragraph 1 above shall
be assigned, as soon as the application has been lodged and
without prejudice to any subsequent application of Arti-
cles 14 and 51 of the Rules of Procedure, to Chambers of
three Judges.

Cases referred to in this paragraph shall be allocated to the
Chambers in turn, in step with the date on which they are
registered at the Registry, following three separate rotas:

— for cases concerning application of the competition rules
applicable to undertakings, the rules on State aid and the
rules on trade protection measures;

— for cases concerning the intellectual property rights
referred to in Article 130(1) of the Rules of Procedure;

— for all other cases.

In applying those rotas, the two Chambers sitting with three
Judges which are composed of four Judges shall be taken
into consideration twice at each third turn.

Parties

Applicants: Alfonsius Alferink,
(Heeten, Netherlands), and the
other 67 applicants whose names are set out in the annex to
(represented initially by H. Bronkhorst and
the judgment
E. Pijnacker Hordijk, subsequently by H. Bronkhorst, E. Pijnacker
Hordijk and J. Sluysmans, and finally by E. Pijnacker Hordijk,
lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: T. van Rijn, Agent)

Re:

Claims for damages under Article 178 of the EC Treaty (now
Article 235 EC) and the second paragraph of Article 215 of the
EC Treaty (now the second paragraph of Article 288 EC)
seeking compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the
applicants by reason of the fact that the Commission infringed
the principle of legal certainty when it adopted Regulation (EEC)
No 1033/89 of 20 April 1989 amending Regulation (EEC)
No 1546/88 laying down detailed rules for the application of
the additional levy referred to in Article 5c of Council Regu-
lation (EEC) No 804/68 (OJ 1989 L 110, p. 27), which did not
provide clearly and precisely that milk production had to be
resumed from the initial SLOM holding.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Alfonsius Alferink and the other 67 applicants whose

names are listed in the annex to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 358, 21.11.1998.