CELEX: C1996/064/15
Language: en
Date: 1996-03-02 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 18 December 1995 by the Federal Republic of Germany against the Commission of the European Communities (Case C-396/95)

2 . 3 . 96             EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                  No C 64/7
      matches in competitions which they organize, football                          OPINION 3/94 OF THE COURT
      clubs may field only a limited number of professional                               of 13 December 1995 f 1 )
      players who are nationals of other Member States;
                                                                        (GATT — WTO — Framework Agreement on Bananas)
3 . the direct effect ofArticle 48 of the EC Treaty cannot be                                      ( 96/C 64/14 )
      relied upon in support of claims relating to a fee in
      respect of transfer, training or development which has           Request made to the Court on 25 July 1994 under
      already been paid on, or is still payable under an               Article 228 ( 6 ) of the EC Treaty by the Federal Republic of
      obligation which arose before, the date ofthis judgment,         Germany for an opinion on the compatibility with the
      except by those who have brought court proceedings or            Treaty of the Framework Agreement on Bananas between
      raised an equivalent claim under the applicable national         the European Community and Colombia, Costa Rica,
      law before that date.                                            Nicaragua and Venezuela and asking:
(>) OJ No C 312, 18 . 11 . 1993 .                                      ( a ) was the Framework Agreement on Bananas which was
                                                                             signed by the Commission on 28 and 29 March 1994
                                                                             duly negotiated from the point of view of procedural
                                                                             law, that is to say,
                                                                             — on the basis of a sufficient negotiating mandate
                                                                                 from the Council, and
                   ORDER OF THE COURT
                                                                             — in compliance with the relevant negotiating
                        (First Chamber )
                                                                                 directives laid down by the Council ?
                     of 14 December 1995
in Case C-173/95 P: Anne Hogan v. Court of Justice of the              ( b ) is the Framework Agreement on Bananas compatible
                   European Communities ( 1 )                                with the Treaty from the point of view of the
                                                                             substantive law ?
     (Appeal clearly inadmissible and clearly unfounded)
                            ( 96/C 64/ 13 )
                                                                       The Court, composed of: G. C. Rodriguez Iglesias,
                                                                       President, C. N. Kakouris, D. A. O. Edward and G. Hirsch
                 (Language of the case: Italian)                       ( Presidents of Chambers ), G. F. Mancini, F. A, Schockweiler
                                                                       ( Rapporteur ), J. C. Moitinho de Almeida, P. J. G. Kapteyn,
                                                                       C. Gulmann, J. L. Murray, P. Jann. H. Ragnemalm and L.
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be           Sevón, Judges, after hearing G. Tesauro , First
           published in the European Court Reports)                    Advocate-General , C. O. Lenz, F. G. Jacobs , A. M. La
                                                                       Pergola , G. Cosmas, P. Leger, M. B. Elmer, N. Fennelly and
In Case C-173/95 P , Anne Hogan, an official of the                    D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer, Advocates-General, finds :
European Parliament, resident in Luxembourg, represented
by Giancarlo Lattanzi, of the Massa-Carrara Bar, with                  there is no need to respond to the request for an
address for service in Luxembourg at 33 Rue Godchaux,                  opinion.
appellant, appeals against the judgment of the Court of First
Instance of the European Communities ( Fourth Chamber )
                                                                        (') OJ No C 275 , 1 . 10 . 1994 .
of 29 March 1995 in Case T-497/93 Hogan v. Court of
Justice [ 19951 ECR-SC 11-251 , seeking to have that
judgment set aside, the other party to the proceedings being:
Court of Justice of the European Communities ( Agents :
Luigia Maggioni and Niels Lierow ). The Court ( First
 Chamber ), composed of: D. A. O. Edward, President of the
 Chamber, P. Jann ( Rapporteur ) and M. Wathelet, Judges,
Advocate-General : A. La Pergola , Registrar: R. Grass, has             Action brought on 18 December 1995 by the Federal
given a judgment on 14 December 1995 , in which it:                     Republic of Germany against the Commission of the
                                                                                            European Communities
                                                                                                 Case C-396/95 )
 1 . dismisses the appeal;
                                                                                                    ( 96/C 64/ 15 )
 2 . orders the appellant to pay the costs.
                                                                        An action against the Commission of the European
                                                                        Communities was brought before the Court of Justice of the
 (') OJ No C 208 , 12 . 8 . 1995 .                                      European Communities on 18 December 1995 by the
                                                                        Federal Republic of Germany, represented by Ernst Rder,
                                                                        Ministerialrat in the Federal Ministry of Economics,
                                                                        D-53107 Bonn .
 ---pagebreak--- No C 64/8              EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                       2 . 3 . 96
The applicant claims that the Court should :                          — declare that the respondent is liable to compensate the
                                                                            appellant for all consequential material damage which
                                                                            he may suffer in the future,
— annul Articles 1 ( 2 ) and 2 to 5 of Commission
    Regulation ( EC ) No 2358/95 of 6 October 1995 ( OJ No            — award the appellant compensation on an equitable basis
    L 241 of 10 October 1995 , p. 5 ),                                      for the non-material damage suffered by him, in a
                                                                            reasonable sum exceeding ECU 2 000,
— order the Commission to pay the costs.                              — in the alternative, remit the case to the Court of First
                                                                            Instance for a re-hearing, a fresh taking of evidence and
                                                                            the delivery of a new decision,
The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as those
in Case C-23/95 ( 1 ). The applicant additionally pleads              — order the respondent to pay all the costs of the
breach of the principle of non-discrimination, since,                       proceedings, including the costs incurred in the
contrary to the declared objective of achieving a single                    preliminary proceedings and the costs of the appeal
market, the contested rules will consolidate the traditional                proceedings,
division of the banana market if — as here — the traditional
relations between certain traders and certain producers are           — alternatively in that regard: reserve its decision on
furthered .                                                                 costs .
                                                                      Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
H OJ No C 74, 25 . 3 . 1995 , p. 6 .
                                                                      Infringement of Community law: to the extent to which the
                                                                      appellant maintains the content of his original
                                                                      applications (2 ), he adopts the grounds of action therein as
                                                                      his pleas in law in the appeal .
                                                                      (M OJ No C 351 , 30 . 12 . 1995 , p . 11 .
                                                                      ( 2 ) OJ No C 338 , 15 . 12 . 1993 , p . 16 .
Appeal brought on 27 December 1995 by Dieter Obst
against the judgment delivered on 19 October 1995 by the
Second Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the
                                                                      Reference for a preliminary ruling by the High Court of
European Communities in Case T-5 62/93 between Dieter
                                                                      Justice in Northern Ireland, Queen's Bench Division, by
 Obst and the Commission of the European Communities
                                                                      order of that court of 13 October 1995 , in the case of
                       ( Case C-403/95 P                              Northern Ireland Fish Producers' Organisation Ltd and
                            96/C 64/ 16                               others against Department of Agriculture for Northern
                                                                                                     Ireland
                                                                                                 ( Case C-4/96 )
An appeal against the judgment delivered on 19 October                                             96/C 64/17)
1995 by the Second Chamber of the Court of First Instance
of the European Communities in Case T-5 62/93 between
                                                                      Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
Dieter Obst and the Commission of the European
                                                                      European Communities by an order of the High Court of
Communities was brought before the Court of Justice of the
                                                                      Justice in Northern Ireland, Queen's Bench Division, of
European Communities on 27 December 1995 by Dieter
                                                                       13 October 1995 , which was received at the Court Registry
Obst, represented by Lothar Mahlberg, Rechtsanwalt, with
                                                                      on 11 January 1996 , for a preliminary ruling in the case of
an address for service in Luxembourg care of Marianne
Moritz, 25a Rue de Schonfels, Bridel .
                                                                      Northern Ireland Fish Producers' Organisation Ltd and
                                                                      others against Department of Agriculture for Northern
                                                                      Ireland, on the following questions :
The appellant claims that the Court should:
                                                                       1 . Is the validity of the allocation to the United Kingdom of
                                                                             its cod and whiting quotas in Area Vila pursuant to
— set aside the judgment of the Second Chamber of the                        Article 3 of Council Regulation ( EC ) No 3362/94 of
    Court of First Instance of 19 October 1995 in Case                       20 December 1994 fixing, for certain fish stocks and
    T-562/93 ( x ) in so far as it dismisses the application and             groups of fish stocks, the total allowable catches for
    orders the appellant to bear his own costs,                              1995 and certain conditions under which they may be
                                                                             fished ( J ) dependent on whether Annex VII to the
                                                                             Council resolution of 3 November 1976 was properly
— annul the respondent's order rejecting the appellant's                     adopted ?
    application for the post in issue, of which he was notified
    by a communication of 22 March 1993 ,                              2 . If the answer to question 1 is in the affirmative, was
                                                                             Annex VII properly adopted ?
— declare that the rejection of the appellant's application
    for the abovementioned permanent position is                       3 . Are the answers to questions 1 or 2 affected by the fact
    unlawful,                                                                that Annex VII is a document which is classified as secret