CELEX: C2002/109/110
Language: en
Date: 2002-05-04 00:00:00
Title: Case T-35/02: Action brought on 13 February 2002 by ALITALIA against the Commission of the European Communities

4.5.2002              EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                        C 109/57
Action brought on 20 February 2002 by EURL Le Levant                     financial investment exclusively in order to benefit from a tax
001 and Others against the Commission of the European                    break. The applicants also maintain that the Commission has
                          Communities                                    infringed Council Directive 90/684/EEC on aid to shipbuilding.
                                                                         They submit that Article 4(7) of that directive can apply only
                                                                         to shipyards or ship operators, and in no circumstances to
                         (Case T-34/02)                                  private investors.
                       (2002/C 109/109)
                                                                         In addition, the applicants plead infringement of the principles
                                                                         of the protection of legitimate expectations and legal certainty
                   (Language of the case: French)                        and failure to comply with the obligation to provide a
                                                                         statement of reasons. Moreover, by ordering the recovery of
                                                                         the alleged aid when that is contrary to the abovementioned
                                                                         general principles of law, the Commission has infringed
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-                Article 14 of Council Regulation No 659/1999 (2).
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 20 February 2002 by the company
EURL Le Levant 001 and Others, represented by Pierre Kirch,              According to the applicants, the contested decision also
lawyer, with an address for service in Luxembourg.                       contains manifest errors of assessment and is based on material
                                                                         inaccuracies.
The applicants claim that the Court should:
                                                                         In addition, the applicants plead infringement of Article 153(2)
—     annul the Commission’s decision of 25 July 2001 on                 of the EC Treaty, in that the Commission does not take into
      the State aid implemented by France in the form of                 account the interests of the applicants, who are consumers of
      development assistance for the cruise vessel ‘Le Levant’,          financial services. Lastly, they claim that the Commission has
      built by Alstom Leroux Naval for operation in Saint-               infringed Article 2 of Regulation No 69/2001 (3) by failing to
      Pierre-et-Miquelon (State aid C 74/99 — France), publi-            apply the de minimis rule.
      shed in OJ L 327 of 12 December 2001, p. 37;
                                                                         (1) Rectifying Finance Law No 86-824 of 11 July 1986, published in
—     order the Commission to pay the costs.
                                                                             JORF (Official Journal of the French Republic) of 12 July 1986,
                                                                             p. 8688.
                                                                         (2) Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying
                                                                             down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC
Pleas in law and main arguments                                              Treaty (OJ L 83 of 27.3.1999, p. 1).
                                                                         (3) Commission Regulation (EC) No 69/2001 of 12 January 2001 on
                                                                             the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to de
The applicants in this case are one-man undertakings with                    minimis aid (OJ L 10 of 13.1.2001, p. 30).
limited liability and the persons who formed those undertak-
ings. Those persons have invested, through a one-man limited
liability undertaking (EURL), in the vessel ‘Le Levant’. The
investment could be inferred from their taxable income, in
accordance with the French ‘Loi Pons’ (1). The applicants
are contesting the Commission’s decision declaring those
companies to be recipients of State aid in consequence of the
construction of the vessel ‘Le Levant’.                                  Action brought on 13 February 2002 by ALITALIA
                                                                           against the Commission of the European Communities
In support of their action, the applicants assert that the
Commission has exceeded its powers by adopting a decision                                          (Case T-35/02)
the effect of which is to require a Member State to recover
from private individuals, and not from undertakings within                                       (2002/C 109/110)
the meaning of Community law, the amount of the State aid.
                                                                                             (Language of the case: Italian)
The applicants further maintain that the Commission has
infringed their rights of defence and their right to a fair
hearing, by not allowing them effectively to submit their
observations prior to the adoption of the decision.                      An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
                                                                         ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
                                                                         European Communities on 13 February 2002 by ALITALIA,
Next, the applicants deny that they are undertakings within              represented by Guido Alpa, Mario Siragusa, Gian Michele
the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty. In the applicants’        Roberti, Giuseppe Scassellati and Francesca Maria Moretti,
view, they are merely private investors who have made a                  lawyers.
 ---pagebreak--- C 109/58                EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                         4.5.2002
The applicant claims that the Court should:                               Sanpaolo IMI spa, represented by Alberto Santa Maria, Claudio
                                                                          Biscaretti di Ruffia, Giuseppe Pizzonia and Marcello Valenti,
—     order the Commission to pay compensation for the                    lawyers.
      damage, to be quantified or in such sum as the Court
      shall think fit, caused to Alitalia by the first decision and
      the conditions imposed thereby and by the fact of that              The applicant claims that the Court should:
      measure having been reproduced by means of the second
      decision;                                                           —     annul the contested decision, issued on 11 December
                                                                                2001 by the Commission of the European Communities,
                                                                                on the grounds that it infringes essential procedural
—     order the Commission to pay interest on the amount
                                                                                requirements and/or is unfounded, contradictory and/or
      referred to above for the period up to the date of
                                                                                lacking in a statement of reasons in accordance with
      payment;
                                                                                Article 253 of the EC Treaty in conjunction with
                                                                                Articles 87 and 77 and with Council Regulation
—     order the Commission to pay the costs.                                    No 659/1999, as expounded in the application;
                                                                          —     alternatively, annul the decision in question wholly or in
                                                                                part pursuant to the second paragraph of Article 230 of
Pleas in law and main arguments                                                 the EC Treaty, inasmuch as it infringes or misapplies
                                                                                Article 87(1) or, in the further alternative, Article 87(3)(b)
                                                                                or (c) of the EC Treaty, as expounded in the application;
By the present action, Alitalia, the same applicant as in Cases
T-296/97 (1) and T-301/01 (2), is seeking an order requiring              —     in the still further alternative, in the inconceivable event
the defendant to pay compensation for the damage allegedly                      that the Court finds that the articles of Law No 461 of
caused by Commission Decision 97/789/EC of 15 July 1997                         23 December 1998 and of Legislative Decree No 153 of
concerning the recapitalisation of the applicant company and                    17 May 1999, to which the contested decision relates,
by the conditions imposed thereby, which it claims to have                      constitute a system of State aid which is incompatible
been reproduced, following the annulment of that first decision                 with the common market, rule that the contested decision
by the judgment of the Court of First Instance of 12 July                       of the Commission cannot have any retroactive effect;
2000 in the abovementioned Case T-296/97, by Decision
2001/723/EC of 18 July 2001.                                              —     subject to the reservation of all rights.
The pleas of illegality are the same as those advanced in the
abovementioned cases.                                                     Pleas in law and main arguments
(1) Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 12 December 2000 in        The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as those
    Case T-296/97 Alitalia v Commission [2000] ECR II-3871.               put forward in Case T-36/02 ABI v Commission.
(2) Case T-301/01 Alitalia v Commission (OJ C 44 of 16.2.2002,
    p. 24).
                                                                          Action brought on 21 February 2002 by Banca Intesabci
                                                                          Spa against the Commission of the European Communi-
Action brought on 21 February 2002 by Banca Sanpaolo                                                       ties
IMI spa against the Commission of the European Com-
                              munities                                                               (Case T-39/02)
                           (Case T-37/02)                                                          (2002/C 109/112)
                         (2002/C 109/111)                                                     (Language of the case: Italian)
                   (Language of the case: Italian)
                                                                          An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
                                                                          ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
                                                                          European Communities on 21 February 2002 by Banca
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-                 Intesabci Spa, represented by Alberto Santa Maria, Claudio
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the                Biscaretti di Ruffia, Giuseppe Pizzonia and Marcello Valenti,
European Communities on 21 February 2002 by Banca                         lawyers.