CELEX: C2000/355/58
Language: en
Date: 2000-12-09 00:00:00
Title: Cases T-245/00, T-246/00 and T-248/00: Action brought on 14 September 2000 by Abibes and Others against Commission of the European Communities

C 355/26               EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                      9.12.2000
—     order the Commission to pay the costs of the application.           —     The Commission infringed the principle of the protection
                                                                                of legitimate expectations in seeking to recover premium
                                                                                payments in circumstances where it has accepted that the
                                                                                applicant came into the terms of Article 2(2)(b) and it has
                                                                                altered its position on foot of the Commission’s actions.
Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                          (1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 2080/92, of 30 June 1992, institut-
                                                                              ing a Community aid scheme for forestry measures in agriculture
                                                                              (OJ L 215, of 30 July 1992, p. 96).
                                                                          (2) Regulation (EEC) No 729/70 of the Counil, of 21 April 1970, on
According to the applicant, the contested decision in the                     the financing of the common agricultural policy (OJ, English
present case, which relates to a Programme for Afforestation                  Special Edition 1970 (I), p. 218).
partially financed by the European Community, has the effect
of
—     preventing the State from paying the EU premiums
      provided for under Regulation No 2080/92 (1) that were
      suspended by the State from 22 November 1999. As a
      result, the State will pay no EU premiums to which the              Action brought on 14 September 2000 by Abibes and
      applicant would otherwise be entitled from 1 September              Others against Commission of the European Communities
      2000.
                                                                                     (Cases T-245/00, T-246/00 and T-248/00)
—     excluding the applicant from the category of persons
      entitled to loss of income premiums pursuant to                                               (2000/C 355/58)
      Article 2(2)(b) of Regulation No 2080/92.
                                                                                              (Language of the case: Italian)
In support of its claims, the applicant makes the following               An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
submissions:                                                              ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
                                                                          European Communities on 14 September 2000 by Abibes
                                                                          and Others, represented by Andrea Bortoluzzi and Chiara
                                                                          Montagner, of the Venice Bar.
—     The contested decision is void since it is based on
      Regulation No 729/70 (2) which, at the date on which the
      decision was taken, had been repealed;                              The applicants claim that the Court should:
                                                                          —     annul Commission Decision 2000/394/EEC;
—     The Commission misinterpreted the provisions of Regu-
      lation No 2080/92 in excluding the applicant from the               —     order the Commission to pay the costs.
      provisions of Article 2(2)(b); it is stressed on this point
      that, since the applicant is a ‘private-law legal person’, the
      concept of ‘public entity’ relied upon by the Commission            Pleas in law and main arguments
      has no basis in law:
                                                                          The pleas in law and main arguments are those relied upon in
                                                                          Cases T-234/00 Fondazione Opera S. Maria della Carità v
—     The contested decision infringes Articles 253 and 295 of            Commission and T-235/00 Codess Sociale and Others (1).
      the Treaty;
                                                                          The applicants claim in particular that there has been a
                                                                          manifest error of assessment of the facts, as well as of
—     The Commission infringed the principles of legal cer-               procedure, in so far as the relief from contributions in question
      tainty, inasmuch as it was under a duty to inform Ireland           are characterised as aid. The applicants also allege infringement
      of any doubts it had concerning eligibility, which it failed        of Article 87(3)(a) and (c) of the Treaty.
      to do; in fact, no objection was taken to Ireland’s
      programme to the extent that it expected that private
      companies, including the applicant, would be bodies                 (1) Not yet published.
      eligible for loss-of-income premiums and on 27 April
      1994, the Commission approved Ireland’s afforestation
      programme.