CELEX: C2000/259/24
Language: en
Date: 2000-09-09 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 21 June 2000 in Case T-537/93: Hervé Tromeur v Council of the European Union and Commission of the European Communities (Action for damages — Non-contractual liability — Milk — Additional levy — Reference quantity — Producer having entered into an undertaking to convert — Production not resumed on expiry of the undertaking)

9.9.2000               EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                       C 259/15
      (c)  The other cases referred to in paragraph 1(b) shall              JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
           be assigned to the First, Second, Third, Fourth and
           Fifth Chambers. Such assignment is to be effected
           on the basis of three separate rotas, reflecting the                                  of 21 June 2000
           order in which the cases are registered at the Court
           Registry:
                                                                        in Case T-537/93: Hervé Tromeur v Council of the
                                                                        European Union and Commission of the European Com-
           —     for the cases referred to in Article 236 of the
                                                                                                    munities (1)
                 EC Treaty and Article 152 of the EAEC Treaty,
           —     for the cases concerning the implementation            (Action for damages — Non-contractual liability — Milk —
                 of the rules on competition applicable to              Additional levy — Reference quantity — Producer having
                 undertakings,                                          entered into an undertaking to convert — Production not
                                                                                    resumed on expiry of the undertaking)
           —     for the other cases covered by paragraph 1(b).
                                                                                                 (2000/C 259/24)
For the purposes of the rota referred to in the first indent of
paragraph 2(c), the assignment of cases concerning intellectual
property to the Second and Fourth Chambers on the basis of                                 (Language of the case: French)
the rota referred to in paragraph 2(b) shall be compensated for
by the assignment of cases to the First, Third and Fifth
Chambers on a pro rata basis.                                           In Case T-537/93: Hervé Tromeur, residing in Fuzunec, France,
                                                                        represented by C. Larzul and F. Buffet, and subsequently by
                                                                        A. Delanoé, of the Rennes Bar, with an address for service in
For the purposes of the rotas referred to in paragraphs 2(a)            Luxembourg at the Chambers of A. May, 398 Route d’Esch, v
and 2(c), the First Chamber and the First Chamber, Extended             Council of the European Union (Agents: M. Colaert and
Composition, presided over by the President of the Court of             M. Núñez Müller) and Commission of the European Communi-
First Instance, shall not be included in those lists every third        ties (Agents: G. Berscheid and M. Núñez Müller) — application
thime the end of a rota is reached.                                     for compensation under Article 178 and the second paragraph
                                                                        of Article 215 of the EC Treaty (now Article 235 EC and the
                                                                        second paragraph of Article 288 EC) for damage suffered by
The President of the Court of First Instance may derogate from          the applicant as a result of his having been prevented
that order on the ground that cases related or with a view to           from marketing milk by virtue of Council Regulation (EEC)
ensuring an even spread of the workload.                                No 857/84 of 31 March 1984 adopting general rules for the
                                                                        application of the levy referred to in Article 5c of Regulation
                                                                        (EEC) No 804/68 in the milk and milk products sector
                                                                        (OJ 1984 L 90, p. 13), as supplemented by Commission
Plenary session                                                         Regulation (EEC) No 1371/84 of 16 May 1984 laying down
                                                                        detailed rules for the application of the additional levy referred
                                                                        to in Article 5c of Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 (OJ 1984
                                                                        L 132, p. 11) — the Court of First Instance of the European
At ist plenary meeting on 4 July 2000, the Court of First               Communities (Single Judge: R.M. Moura Ramos); J. Palacio
Instance decided pursuant to the second subparagraph of                 González, Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judg-
Article 32(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of First           ment on 21 June 2000, in which it:
Instance that where, following the designation of an Advocate
General pusruant to Article 17 of the Rules of Procedure, there
is an even number of Judges in the Court of First Instance
                                                                        1.    Dismisses the application;
sitting in plenary session, the rota established in advance in
accordance with which the President of the Court is to
designate the Judge who will not take part in the judgment of
the case shall be in reverse order to that in which the Judges          2.    Orders the applicant to pay the costs.
rank according to their seniority in office under Article 6 of
the Rules of Procedure, unless the Judge who would thus be
designated is the Judge-Rapporteur. In that event, it shall be
the Judge ranking immediately above him who shall be                    (1) OJ C 314 of 20.11.93.
designated.