CELEX: C1997/166/33
Language: en
Date: 1997-05-31 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 10 March 1997 by Société Générale against the Commission of the European Communities (Case T-62/97)

No C 166/ 14          EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                      31 . 5 . 97
Action brought on 28 February 1997 by Giorgio Lebedef                established at Périgueux ( France ), Serval, established at
   against the Commission of the European Communities                Sainte Eanne ( France ), Besnier Industrie, established at
                        ( Case T-42/97)                              Bourgbarre ( France ), Sovida, established at Chateaubriand
                                                                     ( France ), Sica Ouest Elevage, established at Ploudaniel
                          ( 97/C 166/31 )
                                                                     ( France ), Guinde, established at Montauban de Bretagne
                 (Language of the case: French)                      ( France ), Tarbouriech, established at Villeneuve sur Lot
                                                                     ( France ), Mamellor, established at Charnay les Macon
An action against the Commission of the European                     ( France ), Coopagri Bretagne, established at Landerneau
Communities was brought before the Court of First                    (France ), Collet et Compagnie, established at
Instance of the European Communities on 28 February                  Chateaubourg (France ), Kermene SA, established at Saint
1997 by Giorgio Lebedef, residing in Senningerberg                   Jacut du Mene (France ), and Vals, established at
(Luxembourg ), represented by Gilles Bounéou, of the                 Champagne (France ), represented by Deborah Kryvian, of
Luxembourg Bar, with an address for service in                       the Rouen Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg
Luxembourg at his Chambers, 15 Avenue du Bois.                       at the Chambers of Marc Loesch, 11 Rue Goethe .
The applicant claims that the Court should:                          The applicants claim that the Court should:
— principally, annul the implied decision rejecting Mr               — annul Commission Regulation No 18/97 adopted on
     Lebedef's request for secondment on union duties,                      8 January 1997,
— alternatively, and so far as is necessary:
                                                                     — order the Commission to pay the costs.
     — declare the procedure known as 'secondment on
         union duties' unlawful,
                                                                     Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
     — annul the Commission's decision not to put an end
         to all secondments on union duties already granted          The applicants, French companies producing veal for
         in the past,                                                human consumption, who are already contesting, before
     — order the Commission to pay all the costs .                   the Court of First Instance, Council Regulation No 2222/
                                                                     96 H and Commission Regulation No 2311 /96 ( 2 ), are
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                  applying in the present case for annulment of Commission
                                                                     Regulation ( EEC) No 18/97 of 8 January 1997 amending
The applicant, a member of the union 'Action & Defense               Regulation (EEC ) No 3886/92 laying down detailed rules
— Luxembourg', considers that the Commission's refusal,              for the application of premium schemes in the beef and
first, to allow him secondment on union duties in his                veal sector ( 3 ), inasmuch as it increases the veal carcase
capacity as representative of the abovementioned union               reference weight for Germany from 103 kilograms to 112
and, second, to take a decision concerning the lawfulness            kilograms.
and validity of secondment on union duties allowed in the
past constitutes infringement of Articles 24a, 25 , 37, 38           The applicants also plead unequal treatment and anti­
and 39 of the Staff Regulations and the framework                    competitive discrimination. They maintain that the
agreement governing the relations between the institution            increase in the German carcase reference weight to a
and the trade unions and staff associations and                      weight higher than that in respect of France, which has
Convention No 151 of the International Labour                        been fixed without leaving the competent French
Organization concerning employment relationships in                  authorities any discretion whatever, increases the
public service, which entered into force on 25 February              distortion of competition already criticized in the previous
1981 .                                                               cases, thereby directly benefiting German operators.
                                                                     H Cases T-14/97 and T-15/97 ( OJ No C 94 , 22 . 3 . 1997 ).
                                                                     ( 2 ) Case T-20/97 ( OJ No C 94, 22 . 3 . 1997 ).
                                                                     H OJ No L 5 , 9 . 1 . 1997, p . 17.
Action brought on 7 March 1997 by Sofivo and Others
   against the Commission of the European Communities
                        ( Case T-61/97)
                          ( 97/C 166/32 )
                                                                     Action brought on 10 March 1997 by Société Générale
                 (Language of the case: French)                           against the Commission of the European Communities
                                                                                               ( Case T-62/97)
An action against the Commission of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First                                                ( 97/C 166/33 )
Instance of the European Communities on 7 March 1997
by Sofivo, established at Conde sur Vire ( France ), Sofivo                            (Language of the case: French)
Production, established at Brece ( France ), Sovinor,
established at Conde sur Vire (France ), Denkavit France,            An action against the Commission of the European
established at Montreuil-Bellay ( France ), Sobeval Viande,          Communities was brought before the Court of First
 ---pagebreak---  31 . 5 . 97             EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                        No C 166/ 15
Instance of the European Communities on 10 March 1997                        cannot in any event qualify for a new aid scheme,
by Societe Generale, established in Paris, represented by                    having regard to the aid already received by it in the
Dominique Voillemot, of the Paris Bar, with an address for                   past,
service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Carlos Zeyen,
67 Rue Ermesinde .                                                     — the Commission has infringed the provisions of
                                                                             Article 92 ( 3 ) (c ) of the EC Treaty and the Guidelines
The applicant claims that the Court should:                                  by authorizing emergency aid on terms which are
                                                                             contrary to those invariably imposed in respect of
                                                                             rescue aid, inasmuch as it:
— annul the decision of the Commission, published in
      the Official Journal of 24 December 1996, authorizing                  — does not consist of liquidity help in the form of
      the grant by the French authorities of emergency aid                       loan guarantees or repayable loans bearing normal
      to Credit Lyonnais,                                                        commercial interest rates,
— order the Commission to pay all of the costs and                           — is not restricted to the amount needed to keep
      expenses incurred in the course of the present                             Credit Lyonnais in business,
      proceedings.                                                           — is paid for a particularly lengthy and unjustified
                                                                                 period,
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
                                                                             — is not warranted on the grounds of serious social
                                                                                 difficulties .
The applicant, which is already challenging the decision of
the Commission of 26 July 1995 giving conditional
approval to the aid granted by France to Credit                        (') Case T-32/96 ( OJ No C 133 , 4 . 5 . 1996 , p. 31 ).
                                                                       (2 ) OJ No C 390 , 24 . 12 . 1996 , p. 7.
Lyonnais ( J ), is seeking, in the present case, annulment of
the Commission's decision to raise no objection to the
emergency aid granted in September 1996 (2). It maintains
that :
— the Commission has infringed the provisions of                       Action brought on 13 March 1997 by Martin Neumann
      Article 93 ( 3 ) of the EC Treaty and of its decision of         and Irmgard Neumann-Scholles against the Commission
      26 July 1995 by failing to declare illegal , on the                                of the European Communities
      ground of notification out of time, the emergency aid
                                                                                                   ( Case T-68/97)
      granted and, more particularly, the non-introduction
      of the operation by which EPFR was to invest FF                                                ( 97/C 166/34
      10 000 million in zero coupon bonds,
                                                                                        (Language of the case: German)
— the Commission has infringed the provisions of
      Article 92 ( 3 ) of the EC Treaty, of the ' Community           An action against the Commission of the European
     guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring            Communities was brought before the Court of First
      firms in difficulty' ('the Guidelines') issued for the          Instance of the European Communities on 13 March 1997
      implementation thereof and of its decision of 26 July            by Martin Neumann and Irmgard Neumann-Scholles,
      1995 , by authorizing the grant of additional aid to            resident in Karlsruhe, Germany, represented by Bernd
      Credit Lyonnais which aggravates the incompatibility            Potthast and Hans-Josef Ruber, Rechtsanwalte, Cologne,
     with the common market of the aid authorized on                  with an address for service in Luxembourg at the
      26 July 1995 . The emergency aid authorized:                     Chambers of Ernest Arendt, 8—10 Rue Mathias Hardt.
     — does not contribute to the development of any                  The applicants claim that the Court should :
           sector of activity,
                                                                      — order the Commission to pay the first applicant,
     — does       not     take   the  common      interest  into            Martin Neumann, an orphan's pension pursuant to
          consideration,                                                    Article 80 of the Staff Regulations;
     — reinforces the significance of the aid authorized on           — order the Commission to pay the costs .
          26 July 1995 , the amount of which and the need
           for which are questionable, and which was                  Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
          granted, moreover, in the absence of any real
          restructuring plan or adequate countermeasures to           The second applicant, an official at the European Institute
          remedy the serious distortion of competition                for Transuranium Elements in Karlsruhe whose second
          resulting therefrom,                                        marriage was to a Commission official who died in 1992,
                                                                      applied for a survivor's pension for both herself and her
— the Commission has infringed the provisions of                      son from her first marriage, the first applicant. The first
     Article 92 ( 3 ) (c ) of the EC Treaty and the Guidelines        applicant lived in the household of Mr and Mrs Scholles
      by authorizing emergency aid allowing Credit                    between 1982 and 1990 and was maintained by them
      Lyonnais to continue its activities whilst awaiting the         jointly, as he was during his studies which were completed
     grant of fresh aid, notwithstandig that Credit Lyonnais          in 1995 . The natural father of the first applicant and