CELEX: C2003/158/44
Language: en
Date: 2003-07-05 00:00:00
Title: Case T-134/03: Action brought on 18 April 2003 by Common Market Fertilizers (CMF) against the Commission of the European Communities

C 158/24              EN                          Official Journal of the European Union                                            5.7.2003
Decision of the Oppo-         Refusal of the Opposition.                  majority being obtained and that therefore no opinion was
sition Division:                                                          delivered by the Committee, which precluded the defendant
                                                                          from itself taking a decision as it did. The applicant also alleges
Decision of the Board of      Rejection of the Appeal.                    infringement of Article 906 of Regulation No 2454/93 (4),
Appeal:                                                                   inasmuch as the defendant did not forward to the Member
                                                                          States a copy of the case documents received by the French
Pleas in Law:                 Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of          Customs Authorities, within 15 days following their receipt,
                              Regulation No. 40/94.                       as well as infringement of the rules of procedure of the
                                                                          Customs Code Committee, inasmuch as the applicant’s sub-
                                                                          missions were not sent to the permanent representations and
                                                                          to the members of the Committee within 14 days prior to the
                                                                          date of the meeting. It also alleges infringement of Article 3 of
                                                                          Regulation No 1/1958 (5), maintaining that certain representa-
                                                                          tives of the Member States did not receive a copy of the case
                                                                          documents in their own national language, as well as breach
Action brought on 18 April 2003 by Common Market                          of the right to a fair hearing in so far as the defendant refused
Fertilizers (CMF) against the Commission of the European                  the applicant the right to a hearing and did not give it access
                          Communities                                     to the documents required under Regulation No 1049/
                                                                          2001 (6). Finally, the applicant alleges failure to state reasons
                                                                          for the contested decision.
                        (Case T-134/03)
                        (2003/C 158/44)
                   (Language of the case: French)                         With regard to the substance, the applicant maintains that the
                                                                          defendant made a manifest error of assessment in considering
                                                                          that the requirements of Article 239 of Regulation No 2913
                                                                          were not satisfied. The applicant considers that it is in a special
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-                 situation by reason of the fault committed by its customs
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the                agent, who employed a fictitious bonded warehouse without
European Communities on 18 April 2003 by Common                           the applicant’s knowledge, and the absence of circumvention
Market Fertilizers (CMF), a company established in Brussels,              of the provisions of Regulation No 3319/94. It also states that
represented by Alastair Sutton and Nathalie Flandin, lawyers.             no dishonest conduct can be imputed to it and that it has not
                                                                          displayed any manifest negligence.
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—     annul Commission Decision REM 02/02;
                                                                          (1 ) Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992
                                                                               establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ L 302,
—     order the Commission to pay the costs.                                   19.10.1992, p. 1).
                                                                          (2 ) Council Regulation (EC) No 3319/94 of 22 December 1994
                                                                               imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of urea
                                                                               ammonium nitrate solution originating in Bulgaria and Poland,
Pleas in law and main arguments                                                exported by companies not exempted from the duty, and col-
                                                                               lecting definitively the provisional duty imposed (OJ L 350,
                                                                               31.12.1994, p. 20).
The applicant is a wholesaler of chemical products and in                 (3 ) 1999/468/EC: Council Decision of 28 June 1999 laying down the
particular nitrogen solutions. It applied to the French customs                procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on
                                                                               the Commission (OJ L 184, 17.7.1999, p. 23).
authorities, under Article 239 of Regulation (EC) No 2913/
                                                                          (4 ) Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying
92 (1), for remission of duties in accordance with Article 3(1)                down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation
of Regulation (EC) No 3319/94 ( 2). That application was                       (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code
forwarded by the French authorities to the defendant which,                    (OJ L 253, 11.10.1993, p. 1).
by its contested decision, refused remission.                             (5 ) EEC Council: Regulation No 1 determining the languages to be
                                                                               used by the European Economic Community (OJ, English Special
                                                                               Edition 1952-1958, p. 59).
In support of its action, the applicant relies on pleas in law            (6 ) Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and
based both on alleged infringements of essential procedural                    of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to
requirements and on the substance. With regard to essential                    European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ
procedural requirements, the applicant first alleges infringe-                 L 145, 31.5.2001, p. 43).
ment of Article 7 of the EC Treaty and of Article 5 of
Council Decision No 468/1999 (3). The applicant argues that
application of the principle of weighting of votes, provided for
by Article 205 EC, to the final vote within the Customs
Code Committee, repayment section, resulted in no qualified