CELEX: C1998/007/71
Language: en
Date: 1998-01-10 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 12 November 1997 by Robert Mehlen and Others against the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities (Case T-291/97)

10. 1. 98            EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                          C 7/27
Action brought on 10 November 1997 by Mehibas                      Ð breach of the obligation to provide a statement of
Dordtselaan BV (formerly Expeditie- en Controlebedrijf                  reasons and the principle of proportionality.
Codirex BV) against the Commission of the European
                        Communities                                (1) The Decision concerns the application of Article 13 of Council
                       (Case T-290/97)                                 Regulation (EEC) No 1430/79 of 2 July 1979 on the
                                                                       repayment or remission of import or export duties (OJ L 175,
                         (98/C 7/70)                                   12. 7. 1979, p. 1).
                                                                   (2) OJ C 137, 3. 6. 1995, p. 34.
                                                                   (3) Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993
                (Language of the case: Dutch)                          laying down provisions for the implementation of Council
                                                                       Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community
                                                                       Customs Code (OJ L 253, 11. 10. 1993, p. 1).
An action against the Commission of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First
Instance of the European Communities on 10 November
1997 by Mehibas Dordtselaan BV (formerly Expeditie- en
Controlebedrijf Codirex BV), Rotterdam, represented by
P. V. F. Bos and N. J. Helder, of the Rotterdam Bar, with          Action brought on 12 November 1997 by Robert Mehlen
an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of            and Others against the Council of the European Union
M. Loesch, 11, rue Goethe.                                              and the Commission of the European Communities
                                                                                           (Case T-291/97)
The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                                             (98/C 7/71)
Ð annul the Commission's Decision (C(97)2331 final) of                             (Language of the case: French)
    22 July 1997 (1), addressed to the Netherlands,
                                                                   An action against the Council of the European Union and
Ð order the Commission to pay the costs.                           the Commission of the European Communities was
                                                                   brought before the Court of First Instance of the European
                                                                   Communities on 12 November 1997 by Robert Mehlen
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                and the other applicants whose names are listed in the
                                                                   annex, represented by Fernand Entringer, of the
                                                                   Luxembourg Bar, with an address for service in
The present case is a continuation of Case T-89/95 (2), in         Luxembourg at his Chambers, 34A, rue Philippe II.
which the applicant contested the earlier refusal by the
Commission to decide that the same agricultural levies as
                                                                   The applicants claim that the Court should:
those in issue in the present case should be repaid.
                                                                   Ð declare that there has been wrongful conduct on the
After the Commission had withdrawn the decision at                      part of the Commission and the Council; that their
issue, the case was removed from the register of the Court              wrongful conduct gives rise to the Union's non-
of First Instance.                                                      contractual liability; that damage has been suffered by
                                                                        the applicants as a result of the wrongful conduct; that
                                                                        the Union is required to compensate them for that
The applicant advances the following pleas against the                  damage,
decision contested in the present case:
                                                                   Ð take formal note of the fact that the applicants
Ð lack of competence on the part of the Commission, in                  estimate the damage at Lfrs 3 000 000, without
    that it allowed the mandatory time limit prescribed by              prejudice to any calculation made specifically in
    the second sentence of Article 907 of Regulation                    regard to each undertaking,
    (EEC) No 2454/93 (3) to elapse by failing in good time
    to adopt a decision on the first application for               Ð order the Union to pay the costs of the proceedings.
    remission,
                                                                   Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
Ð breach of the principles of legal certainty and of the
    protection of legitimate expectations, in that the             The applicants are seeking compensation for the damage
    applicant could not have known that its application            which they allege to have suffered as a result of acts and
    for remission had not caused time to start running,            omissions by the Council and the Commission when
                                                                   Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE), Mad Cow
Ð infringement of Article 13 of Regulation (EEC)                   Disease', appeared.
    No 1430/79, in that the Commission failed to take
    into account the different time limits applying under          On the basis of a report published on 7 February 1997 by
    Netherlands law to supplementary applications for              the Temporary Committee of Inquiry into BSE, constituted
    reimbursement of import duties and agricultural levies,        by the European Parliament, the applicants consider that
 ---pagebreak--- C 7/28               EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                10. 1. 98
it has been shown that the Council and the Commission               Majerus-Weis, residing at Christnach (Luxembourg); 42.
have rendered the European Union liable by the                      Henri Mangen, residing at Bertrange (Luxembourg); 43.
commission of highly reprehensible acts and the failure to          Guy Mangen, residing at Berg (Luxembourg); 44. Jean-
adopt measures which would have allowed rectification in            Paul Martzen, residing at Merscheid (Luxembourg);
good time of a catastrophic situation endangering not only          45. Aloyse Marx, residing at Garnich (Luxembourg);
human health but also the public's faith in the institutions        46. Camille Mathey, residing at Stegen (Luxembourg);
governing them. They state that the acts of commission              47. Jean-Marcel Mettendorff, residing at Mecher
and omission by the Council and the Commission have                 (Luxembourg); 48. Jean-Marie Meyrer, residing at
undermined the confidence of the inhabitants of the Union           Welfrange (Luxembourg); 49. Marc Meyer-Ernzen,
in the basic foodstuffs produced in it and so created an            residing at Echternach (Luxembourg); 50. ReneÂ Molitor,
unreasonable fear of those products.                                residing at Berndorf (Luxembourg); 51. Ets. Nicolay
                                                                    FreÁres CEA, established at Reuland (Luxembourg); 52.
The applicants state that, as a result of that misconduct,          Armand Noe, residing at Hachiville (Luxembourg); 53.
all producers of bovine meat and all producers of cows'             Jos Olinger, residing at Ettelbrück (Luxembourg); 54. Ets.
milk have suffered a direct loss of revenue from their              Olinger and Neu GA, established at Grosbous
farming activities of between 25 % and 30 % over a                  (Luxembourg); 55. Georges Peping, residing at Ersange
period of at least three years. They estimate the loss per          (Luxembourg); 56. Ed Praus, residing at Koetschette
undertaking per year as between Lfrs 750 000 and                    (Luxembourg); 57. Emile Raus, residing at Ehlange/Mess
1 500 000, but without prejudice to a subsequent expert's           (Luxembourg); 58. Ets. Sopibo (Louis Boonen),
report. Each producer is therefore claiming three years'            established at Haller (Luxembourg); 59. Nico Schank-
losses of Lfrs 1 000 000, that is to say Lfrs 3 000 000.            Neser, residing at Hautbellain (Luxembourg); 60. Camille
                                                                    Schiltz, residing at Bourglinster (Luxembourg); 61. Robert
                           ANNEX                                    Schmitz-Georges, residing at Marnach (Luxembourg);
                                                                    62. Ets. Sopraco SC, established at Manternach
1. Robert Mehlen, residing at Manternach (Luxembourg);              (Luxembourg); 63. Anne Steichen-Leclere, residing at
2.    Wim      Albers,   residing     at   Boevang/Clervaux         Mondercange (Luxembourg); 64. Etc. Savaco SC,
(Luxembourg); 3. AndreÂ Asseray, residing at Pratz                  established at Colpach-Bas (Luxembourg); 65. Raymond
(Luxembourg); 4. Jos Bich-Mathes, residing at Betzdorf              Thull, residing at Alzingen (Luxembourg); 66. Nico
(Luxembourg); 5. Gusty Biren, residing at Luxembourg; 6.            Turmes, residing at Knaphoscheid (Luxembourg); 67. Jean
Nico Brack, residing at Eschdorf (Luxembourg); 7. Severin           Weiler, residing at Hobscheid (Luxembourg); 68. Norbert
Boonen, residing at Elvange (Luxembourg); 8. Ets.                   Welter, residing at Bourglinster (Luxembourg); 69. Marc
Capriso SC, established at Canach (Luxembourg); 9. Leon             Zenner, residing at Lipperscheid (Luxembourg); 70. LeÂon
Clees and Son, residing at Allerborn (Luxembourg); 10.              Zigrand, residing at Niederpallen (Luxembourg); 71. Jean-
Peter Dahmen, residing at Mützenich (Federal Republic of            Claude Zinnen, residing at Savelborn (Luxembourg).
Germany); 11. Robert Duhr-Arendt, residing at
Manternach (Luxembourg); 12. Jean Dupont, residing at
Diekirch (Luxembourg); 13. Camille and Paul Eicher,
residing at Marnach (Luxembourg); 14. Alphonse Elsen,
residing at Goeblange (Luxembourg); 15. Nic Erpelding,                       Removal from the register of T-111/95 (1)
residing at Oberwampach (Luxembourg); 16. Peter Feinen,                                       (98/C 7/72)
residing at Rommersheim (Federal Republic of Germany);
17. Alphonse Ferber, residing at Buschrodt (Luxembourg);                            (Language of the case: French)
18. Marcel Ferring, residing at Betzdorf (Luxembourg);              By order of 13 November 1997, the President of the First
19. Henri Frank, residing at Garnich (Luxembourg);                  Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European
20. Georges Friederich, residing at Aspelt (Luxembourg);            Communities ordered the removal from the register of
21. Josy Gengler, residing at Koerich (Luxembourg);                 Case T-111/95: Pierre Jaminon v. Council of the European
22. Gerekens FreÁres, residing at Reichlange (Luxembourg);          Union and Commission of the European Communities.
23. Ed. Gillen, residing at Manternach (Luxembourg);
24. Jean-Marie Godelet, residing at Ell (Luxembourg);               (1) OJ C 189, 22. 7. 1995.
25. Charles Goedert, residing at Ospern (Luxembourg);
26. Fernand Goedert, residing at Ell (Luxembourg);
27. Jacques Greisch-Schmidt, residing at Sanem
(Luxembourg); 28. Louis Guth, residing at Hivange
(Luxembourg); 29. Marc Hansen, residing at Lellig                            Removal from the register of T-156/97 (1)
(Luxembourg); 30. Hilgert-Schmidt, residing at Olm                                            (98/C 7/73)
(Luxembourg); 31. Ets. Hogemav SC, established at
Imbringen (Luxembourg); 32. Jules Jungels, residing at                             (Language of the case: German)
Oetrange (Luxembourg); 33. Mathias and Heinrich Kaut,
                                                                    By order of 12 November 1997, the President of the
residing at Burg-Reuland (Belgium); 34. Emile Kieffer,
                                                                    Fourth Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the
residing at Reichlange (Luxembourg); 35. Guy Kneip,
                                                                    European Communities ordered the removal from the
residing at Beiler (Luxembourg); 36. Marcel Laplume,
                                                                    register of Case T-156/97: Achim Berge v. Commission of
residing at Asselborn (Luxembourg); 37. Edy LoeÈsch-
                                                                    the European Communities.
Eischen, residing at Buschrodt (Luxembourg); 38. Joseph
Lux, residing at Holzem (Luxembourg); 39. AndreÂ
                                                                    (1) OJ C 228, 26. 7. 1997.
Majerus, residing at Mecher (Luxembourg); 40.Servais
Majerus, residing at Kuborn (Luxembourg); 41. Alphonse