CELEX: C2001/289/61
Language: en
Date: 2001-10-13 00:00:00
Title: Case T-141/01: Action brought on 20 June 2001 by Entorn, Sociedat Limitada Enginyeria i Serveis against Commission of the European Communities

C 289/24                EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                       13.10.2001
    JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE                                     ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
                          of 27 June 2001                                                             of 7 June 2001
                                                                          in Case T-328/00: Mario Costacurta v Commission of the
in Joined Cases T-164/99, T-37/00 and T-38/00 Alain                                           European Communities (1)
   Leroy and Others v Council of the European Union (1)
                                                                          (Officials — Assignment of the applicant to a third country
(Decision 1999/307/EC — Integration of the Schengen                       in 1993 — Reintegration of the official in the Publications
Secretariat into the General Secretariat of the Council —                 Office in 1996 — Loss of entitlement to the derogating
                       Action for annulment)                              provisions of Annex X to the Staff Regulations — Request
                                                                          to be reassigned to a third State submitted in 2000 on the
                                                                          basis of Annex X — Inadmissibility of the action directed
                          (2001/C 289/59)                                           against the Commission’s implied decisions)
                                                                                                    (2001/C 289/60)
                    (Language of the case: French)
                                                                                               (Language of the case: French)
In Joined Cases T-164/99, T-37/00 and T-38/00 Alain Leroy,
former employee of the Economic Union of Belgium, the                     In Case T-328/00: Mario Costacurta, an official of the Com-
Netherlands and Luxembourg (Benelux) seconded to the                      mission of the European Communities, residing in Luxem-
Schengen Secretariat, residing in Grimbergen, Belgium, Yan-               bourg, represented by M. Petit, lawyer, with an address for
nick Chevalier-Delanoue, official of the Council of the Euro-             service in Luxembourg, against Commission of the European
pean Union, residing in Brussels, Belgium, Virginia Joaquim               Communities (Agent: J. Currall) — application for annulment
Matos, residing in Montijo, Portugal, represented by G. Vander-           directed, first, against a supposed implied rejection of the
sanden and L. Levi, lawyers, with an address for service in               request to be reassigned to a third State, dated 6 June 2000,
Luxembourg, supported by Union syndicale-Bruxelles, estab-                and, secondly, against a supposed implied rejection of the
lished in Brussels, represented by S. Parmesan, lawyer, with an           applicant’s complaint of 24 October 2000 — the Court of
address for service in Luxembourg, intervener in Case T-                  First Instance (Second Chamber), composed of A.W.H. Meij,
164/99, against Council of the European Union (Agents:                    President, A. Potocki and J. Pirrung, Judges; H. Jung, Registrar,
M. Bauer, F. Anton, and A. Bentley) — application — in Case               made an order on 7 June 2001, the operative part of which is
T-164/99 — for annulment of Council Decision 1999/307/EC                  as follows:
of 1 May 1999 laying down the detailed arrangements for the
integration of the Schengen Secretariat into the General
Secretariat of the Council (OJ 1999 L 119, p. 49) and — in                1.    The application is dismissed as inadmissible.
Cases T-37/00 and T-38/00 — for annulment of Decision
1999/307, of various decisions of the Council appointing                  2.    The applicant shall bear all the costs, including those relating
other persons to posts within that institution, and of the                      to the interlocutory proceedings.
implied decisions of the Council not to appoint the applicants
to any of those posts, and for damages — the Court of
                                                                          (1) OJ C 372 of 23.12.00.
First Instance (Second Chamber), composed of A.W.H. Meij,
President, A. Potocki and J. Pirrung, Judges; D. Christensen,
Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on
27 June 2001, in which it:
1.    Dismisses the actions;
                                                                          Action brought on 20 June 2001 by Entorn, Sociedat
2.    In Case T-164/99, orders the applicant to bear his own costs        Limitada Enginyeria i Serveis against Commission of the
      and pay those incurred by the Council, and orders the intervener                          European Communities
      to bear its own costs;
                                                                                                     (Case T-141/01)
3.    In Cases T-37/00 and T-38/00, orders the parties to bear
      their own costs.
                                                                                                    (2001/C 289/61)
                                                                                              (Language of the case: Spanish)
(1) OJ C 281 of 2.10.99.
                                                                          An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
                                                                          ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
 ---pagebreak--- 13.10.2001            EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                     C 289/25
European Communities on 20 June 2001 by Entorn, Sociedat               Action brought on 2 July 2001 by D.L.D. Trading Com-
Limitada Enginyeria i Serveis, whose registered office is in           pany Import-Export, spol. s.r.o. against the Council of the
Barcelona (Spain), represented by Marı́a do Carmo Belard-                                      European Union
Kopke Marques-Pinto.
                                                                                               (Case T-146/01)
The applicant claims that the Court should:                                                    (2001/C 289/62)
                                                                                         (Language of the case: German)
—     annul in its entirety Commission Decision C(1999) 534
      of 4 March 1999 withdrawing the assistance granted to
      Entorn, Sociedat Limitada Enginyeria i Serveis under
      Decision C(93) 3394 of 26 November 1993 relating to              An action against the Council of the European Union was
      the granting of EAGGF — Guidance Section assistance in           brought before the Court of First Instance of the European
      accordance with Council Regulation (EEC) No 4256/88              Communities on 2 July 2001 by D.L.D. Trading Company
      for Project No 93.ES.06.030 entitled ‘Project demonstrat-        Import-Export, spol. s.r.o., Brno, Czech Republic, represented
      ing sumac cultivation using new cultivation techniques’;         by Johannes Hintermayr, Georg Minichmayr and Peter Burg-
                                                                       staller.
—     order the Commission of the European Communities to
      pay the costs.                                                   The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                       1.    order the Council to pay the applicant ATS
                                                                             10 000 000 within 14 days and declare the current
                                                                             version of Article 5(8) of Council Directive 69/169/EEC
                                                                             concerning travellers’ allowances and Regulation (EC)
Pleas in law and main arguments                                              No 2744/98 contrary to Community law;
                                                                       2.    order the Council to pay the costs.
The applicant claims, first, that the Commission has committed
an error of assessment of the facts in regarding it as the
addressee of the contested decision ordering the repayment of          Pleas in law and main arguments
EUR 725 094. In the applicant’s view, the Commission
acknowledged from the start of the project that the beneficiary
of the Community financial contribution was Entorn, Trading            The applicant is established in Brno, Czech Republic, and
Limited, a company incorporated under Irish law, with which            operates two ‘Duty Free Shops’ in that country. In practice, it
the applicant, Entorn, Sociedat Limitada Enginyeria i Serveis,         sells goods exclusively to travellers who import them into
has no economic, legal or financial connection whatsoever. It          Austria in their personal luggage for their personal use.
was to that organisation that was actually transferred the sum
of EUR 725 094, now being claimed from the applicant who
never received any monies whatever from the Commission.
                                                                       It argues that Council Regulation (EC) No 2744/98 (1) and/or
                                                                       Article 5(8) of Directive 69/169/EEC as amended by Council
                                                                       Directive 91/191/EEC (2) are contrary to primary Community
                                                                       law and the general principles of the Community and are
The applicant submits, secondly, that the contested decision is        illegal.
vitiated by a breach of essential procedural requirements, since
the formalities necessary for its adoption have not been
complied with. Indeed, the Commission has not provided the             The Council regulation on exemption from customs duty as
defendant with an opportunity to defend itself prior to the            amended by Regulation (EC) No 2744/98 exempts imports of
closure of the administrative procedure, thereby offending             goods from a non-member country contained in luggage
against the fundamental principle of Community law which               which are not commercial in character. However, the exemp-
provides that, in any proceedings against a person which may           tion applies only up to a certain maximum value. Pursuant to
result in a decision adversely affecting it, the right to a fair       a derogating provision, the duty-free limit which applied in
hearing must be observed, a principle which applies even               Austria until 31 December 1997 was 75 ecus. On 14 Decem-
where there does not exist any legislation governing such              ber 1998, the Council adopted Regulation (EC) No 2744/98,
procedure.                                                             whereby the duty-free amount may be limited by national
                                                                       measures, and made that regulation enter into force retro-
                                                                       actively on 1 January 1998, extending the derogation from the
                                                                       uniform system of exemption from customs duty for a period
                                                                       of eight years overall.