CELEX: C2003/213/10
Language: en
Date: 2003-09-06 00:00:00
Title: Case C-174/03: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunale Amministrativo per la Sardegna by order of that Court of 15 January 2003 and 12 February 2003 in the case of Impresa Portuale di Cagliari s.r.l. against Tirrenia di Navigazione SpA and C.T.O. Combined Terminals Operators s.r.l.

C 213/6                 EN                         Official Journal of the European Union                                         6.9.2003
2)     If so: if the State waives its claim to the portion of the          Appeal brought on 6 May 2003 by Strabag Benelux NV
       fees due to it in respect of that legal transaction, thereby        against the judgment delivered on 25 February 2003 by
       ceasing to enforce the legal provision requiring a portion          the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) in Case T-183/
       of the fees to be remitted to the State, do the fees cease to        00 Strabag Benelux NV v Council of the European Union
       constitute a tax for the purposes of Directive 69/335?
                                                                                                   (Case C-186/03 P)
                                                                                                    (2003/C 213/11)
                                                                           An appeal has been brought before the Court of Justice of the
                                                                           European Communities on 6 May 2003 by Strabag Benelux
                                                                           NV, represented by A. Delvaux and V. Bertrand, with an
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunale                        address for service in Luxembourg, against the judgment
Amministrativo per la Sardegna by order of that Court of                   delivered on 25 February 2003 by the Court of First Instance
15 January 2003 and 12 February 2003 in the case of                        (Fifth Chamber) in Case T-183/00 Strabag Benelux NV v
Impresa Portuale di Cagliari s.r.l. against Tirrenia di                    Council of the European Union.
Navigazione SpA and C.T.O. Combined Terminals Oper-
                              ators s.r.l.                                 The appellant claims that the Court should:
                                                                           —     set aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance
                          (Case C-174/03)                                        inasmuch as it dismissed the applications for annulment
                                                                                 and compensation on the ground that they were
                                                                                 unfounded;
                          (2003/C 213/10)
                                                                           —     uphold the forms of order sought by STRABAG in respect
                                                                                 of those applications and accordingly:
                                                                                 —     annul the decision of 12 April 2000 by which the
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                                 Council awarded to the DE WAELE company the
European Communities by order of the Tribunale Amministra-                             refitting and general maintenance work contract
tivo per la Sardegna (The Administrative Court for Sardinia) of                        which was the subject of invitation to tender
15 January 2003 and 12 February 2003, received at the Court                            No 107865 published in the Official Journal of the
Registry on 14 April 2003, for a preliminary ruling in the                             European Communities S 146 of 30 July 1999, and
case of Impresa Portuale di Cagliari s.r.l. against Tirrenia di                        by which the Council implicitly rejected the tender
Navigazione SpA and C.T.O. Combined Terminals Operators                                submitted by STRABAG;
s.r.l. on the following questions:
                                                                                 —     order the Council of the European Union to pay to
                                                                                       STRABAG, subject to any increase, the sum of
(a)    whether, in accordance with the recitals in the preamble                        BEF 153 421 286 or EUR 3 803 214 together with
       to Directive 93/38 (1), a company in the maritime trans-                        interest thereon at the rate of 6 % as from 12 April
       port sector, which in some cases operates under a de                            2000;
       facto monopoly and in others in circumstances of free
       competition and which benefits from State aid is to be              —     order the Council of the European Union to pay the costs.
       regarded as always subject to the Directive 93/98,
       and, in the event that such a company is subject to the
       rules on public notice,                                             Pleas in law and main arguments
(b)    whether the ‘technical specifications’ mentioned in                 In support of its application for annulment, the appellant puts
       Article 18 of Directive 93/38 (transposed by Article 19             forward four pleas in law.
       of Legislative Decree No 158/95) must be established
       prior to the procedure for selecting a contractor and               The first plea is divided into two limbs. The appellant first
       whether they are subject to any publicity requirements.             criticises the Court of First Instance for failing properly to
                                                                           construe the concepts of ‘contract’ and ‘decision’ in so far as it
                                                                           took the view that the contract which the Council concluded
( 1) Council Directive 93/38/EEC of 14 June 1993 coordinating the          with the successful tenderer constituted the decision to award
     procurement procedures of entities operating in the water,            the contract. Second, the appellant claims that the Court of
     energy, transport and telecommunications sectors (OJ L 199 of         First Instance breached Article 8(3) of Directive 93/37/EEC
     09.08.1993, p. 84).                                                   concerning the coordination of procedures for the award of
                                                                           public works contracts in so far as the Court took the view
                                                                           that the written report required under that provision could
                                                                           consist of three documents, that is to say, the report to the