Case C-27/09 P: Appeal brought on 21 January 2009 by the French Republic against the judgment delivered on 4 December 2008 by the Court of First Instance (Seventh Chamber) in Case T-284/08 People's Mojahedin Organisation of Iran v Council of the European Union
Date: 2009-01-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Council of the European Union, appeal, economic sanctions, international sanctions, restriction of liberty, terrorism

C 82/14

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

4.4.2009

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Sió-Eckes Kft.

Appeal brought on 21 January 2009 by the French
Republic against the judgment delivered on 4 December
2008 by the Court of First Instance (Seventh Chamber) in
Case T-284/08 People's Mojahedin Organisation of Iran v
Council of the European Union

Defendant: Mezőgazdasági és Vidékfejlesztési Hivatal Központi
Szerve

Questions referred

1. May Article 2(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/96 (1)
be interpreted as meaning that, in accordance with Annex I,
the production aid scheme applies, not only to peaches in
syrup and/or in natural
juice included in CN code
ex 2008 70 61, but also to the products with other CN
codes listed in that annex (ex 2008 70 69, etc)?

fruit

2. Does the processor which manufactures products under CN
code ex 2008 70 92 comply with the provisions of Regu-
lation No 2201/96?

3. May Article

2(1)

of Commission Regulation

(EC)
No 1535/2003 (2) be interpreted as meaning that
the
ex 2008 70 61,
products
ex
2008 70 79,
ex
ex 2008 70 92, ex 2008 70 94 and ex 2008 70 99 are also
finished products within the meaning of the regulation?

by CN codes
2008 70 71,

2008 70 69,

designated

ex

4. In so far as, in accordance with the answers to the previous
questions, the definition of finished products is applicable
only to the peaches described in Article 3 of Commission
Regulation (EEC) No 2320/89 (3), why are the CN codes of
other products included in the regulations previously cited?

5. In accordance with the regulations cited above, may the
products resulting from the separate phases of peach proces-
sing be regarded as finished products, regardless of whether
they may be marketed (for example, the pulp)?

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/96 of 28 October 1996 on the
common organisation of the markets in processed fruit and vege-
table products (OJ 1996 L 297, p. 29).

(2) Commission Regulation (EC) No 1535/2003 of 29 August 2003
laying down detailed rules for applying Council Regulation (EC)
No 2201/96 as regards the aid scheme for products processed from
fruit and vegetables (OJ 2003 L 218, p. 14).

(3) Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2320/89 of 28 July 1989 of
minimum quality requirements for peaches in syrup and peaches in
natural fruit juice for the application of the production aid scheme
(OJ 1989 L 220, p. 54).

(Case C-27/09 P)

(2009/C 82/26)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: French Republic (represented by: E. Belliard, G. de
Bergues, A.-L. During, acting as Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings: People's Mojahedin Organisation
of Iran, Council of the European Union, Commission of the
European Communities

Form of order sought

— set aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities of 4 December 2008 in Case
T-284/08 People's Mojahedin Organisation of
Iran v
Council;

— itself give final

in the case by dismissing the
PMOI's action or refer the case back to the Court of First
Instance.

judgment

Pleas in law and main arguments

The French Government considers that
the judgment under
appeal should be set aside, first, because the Court of First
Instance erred in law by holding that the Council had adopted
Decision 2008/583/EC (1) in disregard of the PMOI's rights of
defence, without taking account of the specific circumstances of
the adoption of that decision; second, because the Court erred
in law by considering that the judicial procedure opened in
France against alleged members of the PMOI did not constitute
a decision meeting the definition in Article 1(4) of Common
Position 2001/931/CFSP of 27 December 2001 on the applica-
tion of specific measures to combat
finally,
because the Court erred in law by holding that the refusal by
the Council to communicate point 3 a) of one of the three
documents supplied by the French authorities to the Council in
support of their request for the inclusion of the PMOI in the list
established by Decision 2008/583/EC, and sent to the Court by
the Council in response to the Court Order of 26 September

terrorism; and,

4.4.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 82/15

2008 on measures of
inquiry, did not enable the Court to
review the lawfulness of Decision 2008/583/EC and infringed
the right to effective judicial protection.

According to the Portuguese Administration's own information,
none of those obligations has been fulfilled in Portugal.

(1) Council Decision of 15 July 2008 implementing Article 2(3) of
Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures
directed against certain persons and entities with a view to
combating terrorism and repealing Decision 2007/868/EC (OJ 2008
L 188, p. 21).

(1) OJ 1997 L 10, p. 13.

Action brought on 22 January 2009 — Commission of the
European Communities v Portuguese Republic

(Case C-30/09)

(2009/C 82/27)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi
Bíróság (Hungary) lodged on 26 January 2009 — Bolbol
Nawras v Bevándorlási és Állampolgársági Hivatal

(Case C-31/09)

(2009/C 82/28)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Fővárosi Bíróság

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: A. Sipos and P. Guerra e Andrade, acting as Agents)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Bolbol Nawras

Defendant: Bevándorlási és Állampolgársági Hivatal

Defendant: Portuguese Republic

Forms of order sought

— Declare that, by not drawing up external emergency plans
for the establishments requiring such plans, the Portuguese
Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 11
of Council Directive 96/82/EC (1) of 9 December 1996 on
the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous
substances, as amended by Directive 2003/105/EC of the
European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December
2003;

— Order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

It is apparent from the letters sent by the Portuguese Adminis-
tration to the Commission in this matter that none of the estab-
lishments required to draw up emergency plans has had its
external emergency plan approved in accordance with the direc-
tive.

Article 11 of Directive 96/82 requires Member States to ensure
that operators supply to the competent authorities the informa-
tion necessary to draw up external emergency plans. The
competent authorities must prepare such emergency plans.

Under Article 11(4) of the directive, internal and external emer-
gency plans must be reviewed, tested, revised and updated at
intervals of no longer than three years.

Questions referred

the purposes of Article 12(1)(a) of Council Directive

For
2004/83/EC (1)

1. Must someone be regarded as a person receiving the protec-
tion and assistance of a United Nations agency merely by
virtue of the fact he is entitled to assistance or protection or
is it also necessary for him actually to avail himself of that
protection or assistance?

2. Does cessation of the agency's protection or assistance mean
residence outside the agency's area of operations, cessation of
the agency and cessation of the possibility of receiving the
agency's protection or assistance or, possibly, an objective
obstacle such that the person entitled thereto is unable to
avail himself of that protection or assistance?

3. Do the benefits of

this directive mean recognition as a
refugee, or either of the two forms of protection covered by
the directive (recognition as a refugee and the grant of
subsidiary protection), according to the choice made by the
Member State, or, possibly, neither automatically but merely
inclusion in the scope ratione personae of the directive?

(1) Council Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004 on minimum stan-
dards for the qualification and status of third country nationals or
stateless persons as refugees or as persons who otherwise need inter-
national protection and the content of
the protection granted
(OJ 2004 L 304, p. 12).