Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

[**Avis juridique important**](../../../editorial/legal_notice.htm)

*|*

# 91999E2092

**WRITTEN QUESTION E-2092/99 by Georg Jarzembowski (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Dispute between Kockums Computer Systems GmbH and the European Union.** 
  
*Official Journal 203 E , 18/07/2000 P. 0134 - 0134*

  

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2092/99

by Georg Jarzembowski (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(19 November 1999)

Subject: Dispute between Kockums Computer Systems GmbH and the European Union

The company Hamburg Kockums Computer Systems GmbH (previously known as SCHIFFKO, Schiffskonstruktion und Entwicklungs GmbH) is still claiming payments in relation to the 1988 full economic cost contract, number RI1B-0198-C, with the European Economic Community. In the dispute about the outstanding payments, the latest letter of 13 May 1998 from Mr Arturo Garcia Arroyo, DG XII, Directorate C, European Commission, announced that a full audit by the Commission services would be undertaken so that the dispute could finally be settled. The company, Kockums Gmbh, and their lawyers, Cyros, Makowski and Partner, Hamburg, are still waiting for the Commission's response.

The Commission is therefore asked:

1. Why has the Commission not yet replied to the many queries, sent on 20 July 1998, 14 September 1998, 3 November 1998, 4 January 1999 and 3 February 1999, from the lawyers Cyros, Makowski and Partner, all of which were sent to Mr Arroyo in DG XII? When does the Commission intend to reply?

2. What is the current position in this dispute? How does the Commission assess the claims? How is this matter to be concluded?

Answer given by Mr Busquin on behalf of the Commission

(8 December 1999)

From 1993 to 1998, the Commission has made it clear in writing, by telephone and in meetings with Kockums Computer Systems GmbH and its legal representatives, that its cost claims under the above research contract (1988-1992) had no foundation and has provided detailed information and documentation to this end. It had been proposed that a full financial audit be carried out, but this could not be carried out as the contractual period in which this could be done had expired. However, the Commission has exhausted all manner of response and maintains its position that it has fulfilled its obligations under the contract. There is no further action foreseen on the part of the Commission.

[Top](#document1)