Case T-371/08 P: Appeal brought on 8 September 2008 by Bart Nijs against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal delivered on 26 June 2008 in Case F-5/07 Nijs v Court of Auditors
Date: 2008-09-08
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Court of Auditors, appeal, civil service, cost analysis, deadline for payment, exchange of information, infringement of EU law

22.11.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 301/45

Finally, the applicants claim that by failing to initiate an interim
review the Community institutions committed a manifest error
of assessment and breached Article 1(4) of the basic regulation
when they based their findings on too broad scope of products
which led them to compare unlike products and thus arrive at
invalid findings.

Hungarian stranded costs), in so far as it identifies the applicant
as a beneficiary of State aid that is considered to be incompa-
tible with the common market, and in so far as the decision
including
orders Hungary to recover
interest, from the applicant.

the alleged State aid,

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 1796/1999 of 12 August 1999 as
amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 1858/2005 of 8 November
2005 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of steel
ropes and cables originating in the People's Republic of China, India,
South Africa and Ukraine following an expiry review pursuant to
Article 11(2) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96 (OJ 2005 L 299, p. 1)
and Council Regulation (EC) No 1601/2001 of 2 August 2001 as
amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 1279/2007 of 30 October
2007 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on certain iron or
steel ropes and cables originating in the Russian Federation, and
repealing the anti-dumping measures on imports of certain iron or
steel ropes and cables originating in Thailand and Turkey (OJ 2007
L 285, p. 1).

(2) Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on
protection against dumped imports from countries not members of
the European Community (OJ 1996 L 56, p. 1).

Action brought on 5 September 2008 — Csepeli
Áramtermelő v Commission

(Case T-370/08)

(2008/C 301/76)

Language of the case: English

The applicant claims that the Commission failed to evidence
and appropriately justify its conclusion that the power purchase
agreement (‘PPA’) concluded between the applicant — owner of
a power generation facility in Hungary ultimately acquired by
Atel AG — and the Hungarian state-owned electricity whole-
saler, Magyar Villamos Muvek Rt. (‘MVM’), constitutes incompa-
tible State aid. In support of its claims, the applicant raises the
following pleas in law:

In its first plea, the applicant submits that the Commission
infringed Article 253 EC and Article 87(1) EC by failing to state
reasons and by making a manifest error of assessment
in
finding that the applicant's PPA conferred an economic advan-
tage to the applicant.

In its second plea, the applicant submits that the Commission
committed a manifest error of assessment in concluding that
the applicant's PPA distorts competition.

In its third plea, the applicant contends that the Commission
infringed the principles of proportionality and equal treatment,
in that the recovery obligation is unjustified in the specific
circumstances of the case on the basis of general principles of
Community law.
the
Commission made a manifest error of assessment regarding the
methodology that it applied in order to calculate the amounts
to be recovered.

the applicant claims that

In addition,

Parties

Applicant: Csepeli Áramtermelő kft (Budapest, Hungary) (repre-
sented by: Á. Máttyus, K. Ferenczi, B. van de Walle de Ghelcke,
T. Franchoo, and D. Fessenko, lawyers)

Appeal brought on 8 September 2008 by Bart Nijs against
the order of the Civil Service Tribunal delivered on 26 June
2008 in Case F-5/07 Nijs v Court of Auditors

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

— Annul the decision in so far as it identifies Csepel as a bene-
ficiary of State aid that is considered to be incompatible
with the common market, and in so far as the decision
orders Hungary to recover this alleged State aid, including
interest, from Csepel; and

— To order the Commission to pay the costs.

Parties

(Case T-371/08 P)

(2008/C 301/77)

Language of the case: French

Pleas in law and main arguments

Appellant: Bart Nijs (Bereldange, Luxembourg) (represented by F.
Rollinger and A. Hertzog, lawyers)

The applicant requests the annulment of Commission Decision
C(2008) 2223 final, of 4 June 2008 (Case C-41/2005 —

Other party to the proceedings: Court of Auditors of the European
Communities

C 301/46

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

22.11.2008

Form of order sought by the appellant

Form of order sought by the appellant

— Declare the appeal admissible;

— Declare the appeal well-founded;

— Declare the appeal admissible;

— Declare the appeal well-founded;

— Consequently, annul the order of 26 June 2008 in Case
F-5/07 Bart Nijs v Court of Auditors of the European Commu-
nities.

— Consequently, annul the order of 26 June 2008 in Case
the European

F-108/07 Bart Nijs v Court of Auditors of
Communities.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant claims that the Civil Service Tribunal's order is
vitiated by a manifest error in the assessment of procedural
provisions inasmuch as it regards the action as inadmissible by
reason of a failure to comply with the requirements of clarity,
an infringement of the principle of the protection of legitimate
expectations and an erroneous application of the presumption
of legality to the defendant's contentions inasmuch as the order
was made after a single exchange of written pleadings.

In addition, the applicant considers that the contested order is
lacking in clarity, is unsupported by evidence, is vitiated by a
manifest error in the consideration of the pleas in law raised in
the application and does not consider certain matters which the
Tribunal should have considered of its own motion.

The applicant also claims that the contested order should have
taken account of the lack of a statement of reasons at the pre-
litigation stage and that it was wrongly based on a failure to
comply with time-limits,
inasmuch as the Tribunal had not
carried out a suficient investigation to reach that conclusion.

Appeal brought on 10 September 2008 by Bart Nijs against
the order of the Civil Service Tribunal delivered on 26 June
2008 in Case F-108/07 Nijs v Court of Auditors

(Case T-375/08 P)

(2008/C 301/78)

Language of the case: French

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those raised
in Case T-371/08 P.

Appeal brought on 10 September 2008 by Bart Nijs against
the order of the Civil Service Tribunal delivered on 26 June
2008 in Case F-1/08 Nijs v Court of Auditors

(Case T-376/08 P)

(2008/C 301/79)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Bart Nijs (Bereldange, Luxembourg) (represented by F.
Rollinger and A. Hertzog, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings: Court of Auditors of the European
Communities

Form of order sought by the appellant

— Declare the appeal admissible;

— Declare the appeal well-founded;

— Consequently, annul the order of 26 June 2008 in Case
F-1/08 Bart Nijs v Court of Auditors of the European Commu-
nities.

Parties

Pleas in law and main arguments

Appellant: Bart Nijs (Bereldange, Luxembourg) (represented by F.
Rollinger and A. Hertzog, lawyers)

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those raised
in Case T-371/08 P.

Other party to the proceedings: Court of Auditors of the European
Communities