Case C-54/09 P: Appeal brought on 6 February 2009 by the Hellenic Republic against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 11 December 2008 in Case T-339/06 Hellenic Republic v Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2009-02-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU aid, European Commission, Greece, aid to agriculture, appeal, common organisation of markets, viticulture

4.4.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 82/21

Appeal brought on 6 February 2009 by the Hellenic
Republic against
the Court of First
Instance (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 11 December 2008
in Case T-339/06 Hellenic Republic v Commission of the
European Communities

the judgment of

Appeal brought on 16 February 2009 by Georgios
Karatzoglou against the judgment of the Court of First
Instance (First Chamber) delivered on 2 December 2008 in
Case T-471/04 Georgios Karatzoglou v European Agency
for Reconstruction (EAR)

(Case C-54/09 P)

(2009/C 82/37)

Language of the case: Greek

(Case C-68/09 P)

(2009/C 82/38)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Hellenic Republic (represented by: I. Khalkias and M.
Tassopoulou)

Parties

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of
Communities

the European

Appellant: Georgios Karatzoglou (represented by: S. A. Pappas,
dikigoros)

Other party to the proceedings: European Agency for Reconstruc-
tion (EAR)

Form of order sought

— allow the appeal;

— set aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance;

Form of order sought

— uphold the action in accordance with the form of order

sought;

The appellant claims that the Court should:

— order the Commission to pay all the appellant's costs.

— set aside the appealed decision;

Grounds of appeal and main arguments

— Order the Defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.

— Cancel the contested decision of the appointing authority;

(i)

that

The Hellenic Republic submits:
the Court of First
Instance misinterpreted Articles 16(1) and (2) and 17 of Regu-
lation No 1227/2000 in finding that the time-limit laid down
in Article 16(1) is binding, when it is in fact indicative — as is
apparent from the interpretation of Article 16(2) and 17 of the
regulation; (ii) that the Court of First Instance misinterpreted
Article 10 of the Treaty and general principles of law because
the Commission, in agreeing that it was aware of the corrected
data 23 days prior to adoption of the contested decision but did
not take them into account, and that it accepts data which are
submitted belatedly by other Member States while refusing to
do the same in Greece's case, infringes the principles of coopera-
tion in good faith, sound administration and equal treatment;
and (iii) that the judgment of the Court of First Instance under
appeal contains contradictory reasoning given that the recogni-
tion of the binding nature of the time-limit conflicts with the
recognition and admission that the Commission accepts infor-
mation submitted after expiry of the time-limit too.

Pleas in law and main arguments

that

submits

The appellant
in holding that dismissals of
temporary staff do not require reasoning the Court of First
Instance disregarded recent case law of the Court of Justice,
law and infringed art. 253 of the EC
infringed international
Treaty, which imposes a general obligation to give reasons.

The appellant also submits that the CFI was wrong in declaring
that he had not presented evidence capable of establishing the
existence of a misuse of powers. He also contests the finding of
the CFI that there was no breach of the principle of sound
administration.