CELEX: C1997/199/28
Language: en
Date: 1997-06-28 00:00:00
Title: Appeal brought on 5 May 1997 by Fédération Française des Sociétés d'Assurances (FFSA), Union des Sociétés Etrangères d'Assurances (USEA), Groupe des Assurances Mutuelles Agricoles (Groupama), Fédération Nationale des Syndicats d'Agents Généraux d'Assurances (FNSAGA), Fédération Française des Courtiers d'Assurance et de Réassurances (FCA) and Bureau International des Producteurs d'Assurances et de Réassurances (BIPAR) against the judgment delivered on 27 February 1997 by the Third Chamber, Extended Composition, of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities in Case T-106/95 between the Fédération Française des Sociétés d'Assurances (FFSA), Union des Sociétés Etrangères d'Assurances (USEA), Groupe des Assurances Mutuelles Agricoles (Groupama), Fédération Nationale des Syndicats d'Agents Généraux d'Assurances (FNSAGA), Fédération Française des Courtiers d'Assurance et de Réassurances (FCA) and Bureau International des Producteurs d'Assurances et de Réassurances (BIPAR) and the Commission of the European Communities, supported by the French Republic and La Poste (Case C-174/97 P)

No C 199/ 14         EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                      28 . 6 . 97
 project entitled 'Plan d'Eau sur le Lot — Integration d'une             paragraph of Article 5 of the Treaty, the Member States
 microcentrale hydroelectrique basse chute dans le seuil '               are to take all appropriate measures, whether general or
 (Stretch of water on the River Lot — Incorporation in the               particular, to ensure fulfilment of the obligations arising
 barrage weir of a small low-head hydro-electric power                   out of the Treaty or resulting from action taken by the
 station ).                                                              institutions of the Community.
 On 17 January 1991 an advance payment of ECU 83 928                     The Commission notes that the Hellenic Republic has not
was made to the said contracting parties .                               yet taken the appropriate measures to transpose the
                                                                         Directive in question fully into the Greek legal system .
Thereafter, the project was modified and the construction
                                                                         (') OJ No L 375 , 31 . 12 . 1991 , p . 1 .
of a small hydro-electric power station was abandoned . By
letter of 6 November 1992, the SIVU stated that the
financial support of the Community was no longer needed
and, by letter of 18 November 1992, the Commission
terminated the contract and demanded repayment of the
sum advanced .
                                                                        Appeal brought on 5 May 1997 by Fédération Française
The Commission has been unsuccessful in the steps which                 des Sociétés d'Assurances (FFSA), Union des Sociétés
it has taken since then to secure the said repayment.                  Etrangères d'Assurances ( USEA), Groupe des Assurances
                                                                       Mutuelles Agricoles ( Groupama), Fédération Nationale
                                                                        des Syndicats d'Agents Généraux d'Assurances (FNSAGA),
(■) OJ No L 350, 27. 12 . 1985 , p . 29 .                              Fédération Française des Courtiers d'Assurance et de Réas­
                                                                        surances ( FCA) and Bureau International des Producteurs
                                                                       d'Assurances et de Réassurances (BIPAR ) against the
                                                                       judgment delivered on 27 February 1997 by the Third
                                                                       Chamber, Extended Composition, of the Court of First
                                                                       Instance of the European Communities in Case T-l 06/95
Action brought on 5 May 1997 by the Commission of the                  between the Fédération Française des Sociétés d'Assuran­
    European Communities against the Hellenic Republic                 ces ( FFSA), Union des Sociétés Etrangères d'Assurances
                                                                        ( USEA), Groupe des Assurances Mutuelles Agricoles
                       ( Case C-173/97
                                                                       ( Groupama), Fédération Nationale des Syndicats d'Agents
                         ( 97/C 199/27)                                Généraux d'Assurances (FNSAGA), Fédération Française
                                                                       des Courtiers d'Assurance et de Réassurances (FCA ) and
                                                                       Bureau International des Producteurs d'Assurances et de
An action against the Hellenic Republic was brought                    Réassurances       (BIPAR)       and     the Commission  of the
before the Court of Justice on 5 May 1997 by the                       European Communities, supported by the French Republic
Commission of the European Communities, represented                                                   and La Poste
by Maria-Kondou-Durande, of its Legal Service, with an                                          ( Case C-l 74/97 P)
address for service in Luxembourg at the office of Carlos
Gomez de la Cruz, also of the Commission's Legal                                                    ( 97/C 199/28 )
Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
                                                                       An appeal against the judgment delivered on 27 February
The applicant claims that the Court should:                            1997 by the Third Chamber, Extended Composition, of
                                                                       the Court of First Instance of the European Communities
— declare that, by failing to adopt within the period                  in Case T-106/95 between Fédération Française des Socié­
     prescribed the laws, regulations and administrative               tés d'Assurances (FFSA), Union des Sociétés Etrangères
                                                                       d'Assurances ( USEA ), Groupe des Assurances Mutuelles
     provisions necessary to comply fully with Council
     Directive   91 /676/EEC        of    12  December      1991       Agricoles ( Groupama ), Fédération Nationale des Syndicats
                                                                       d'Agents Généraux d'Assurances ( FNSAGA ), Fédération
     concerning the protection of waters against pollution
                                                                       Française des Courtiers d'Assurance et de Réassurances
     caused by nitrates from agricultural sources (') and to
                                                                       ( FCA) and Bureau International des Producteurs d'Assu­
     identify vulnerable zones on its territory, the Hellenic
                                                                       rances et de Réassurances ( BIPAR) and the Commission of
     Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under the
     EC Treaty and that Directive,                                     the European Communities was brought before the Court
                                                                       of Justice of the European Communities on 5 May 1997
                                                                       by Fédération Française des Sociétés d'Assurances ( FFSA ),
— order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.                        Union Syndicale des Sociétés Etrangères d'Assurances
                                                                       ( USEA ), Groupe des Assurances Mutuelles Agricoles
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                    ( Groupama ), Fédération des Syndicats d'Agents Généraux
                                                                       d'Assurances (FNSAGA ), Fédération Française des Cour­
                                                                       tiers d'Assurance et des Réassurances (FCA) and Bureau
Under the third paragraph of Article 189 of the Treaty                 International des Producteurs d'Assurance et de Réassu­
establishing the European Community, a directive is to be              rances ( BIPAR), represented by Dominique Voillemot,
binding, as to the result to be achieved, upon each                    with an address for service in Luxembourg at the
Member State to which it is addressed . Under the first                Chambers of Jacques Loesch, 11 rue Goethe .
 ---pagebreak--- 28 . 6 . 97            EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                No C 199/ 15
The appellants claims that the Court should:                            Action brought on 5 May 1997 by the Commission of the
                                                                            European Communities against the French Republic
                                                                                                  ( Case C-175/97 )
— set aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of
     the European Communities delivered on 27 February                                              ( 97/C 199/29 )
     1997 in Case T-106/95 ,
— consequently, annul the Commission 's decision of                     An action against the French Republic was brought before
     8 February 1995 ('),                                               the Court of Justice on 5 May 1997 by the Commission of
                                                                        the European Communities, represented by Michel Nolin
                                                                        and Laura Pignataro, acting as Agents, with an address for
— declare incompatible with the common market,                          service in Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gomez de la
     pursuant to Article 92 ( 1 ), the provisions in question           Cruz, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
     of the French Law to 2 July 1990 .
                                                                        The applicant claims that the Court should:
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
                                                                        — declare that, by failing to adopt, or in any case
The judgment of the Court of First Instance infringes                        to notify, within the period prescribed the laws,
Articles 90 ( 2 ) and 92 of the EC Treaty.                                   regulations and administrative provisions necessary
                                                                             to comply with Council Directive 93/89/EEC of
                                                                             25 October 1993 on the application by Member States
The Court was wrong to hold that the aid in question,                        of taxes on certain vehicles used for the carriage of
namely an 85 % reduction in property and business taxes,                     goods by road and tolls and charges for the use of
merely offsets the additional public service costs which La                  certain infrastructures ('), the French Republic has
Poste has to bear. In practice, the aid granted benefits all                 failed to fulfil its obligations under the EC Treaty and
of la Poste 's activities, including its competitive activities,             under that Directive,
and there are therefore cross-subsidies . The Court upheld
the Commission 's decision even though there are no
analytical accounts which are the only possible means of                — order the French Republic to pay the costs .
ascertaining that only activities reserved to La Poste have
been subsidized .
                                                                        Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
The evaluation of the additional costs of performing the
reserved activities is fanciful . The activities must be
                                                                        Under the third paragraph of Article 189 of the EC Treaty,
distinguished from competitive activities which must be                 a directive is to be binding, as to the result to be achieved,
pursued on the market in question and the conditions                    upon each Member State to which it is addressed and,
under which they are performed . Article 92 of the Treaty               under Article 5 of the Treaty, the Member States are to
is fully applicable to those competitive activities . It is the         take all appropriate measures, whether general or
Commission's duty to ensure that the aid does not end up
                                                                        particular, to ensure fulfilment of the obligations resulting
subsidizing those activities .                                          in particular from action taken by the institutions of the
                                                                        Community.
According to the contested judgment, La Poste breaks
even on all its activities . It is not the aid which enables La
Poste to break even but the profits improperly made from                Article 13 of the Directive in question provides that the
competitive activities enjoying tax concessions.                        Member States are to bring into force the laws,
                                                                        regulations and administrative provisions necessary to
                                                                        comply therewith by 1 January 1995 .
The 34,7 % weighting used by the Commission to take
account of the advantages enjoyed by La Poste 's
competitive services owing to the existence of the postal               By its judgment in Case C-21 /94 European Parliament v.
network in rural areas, which is upheld by the judgment,                Council [ 1995] ECR 1827, the Court of Justice annulled
is not correct. On the basis of turnover, 75 % of the                   the said Directive but held that its effects should be
activity of offices in rural areas can be calculated to be              preserved until the Council had adopted a new directive .
devoted to competitive services . With that percentage, the             That judgment cannot justify a failure to transpose the
aid is much greater than the additional costs.                          Directive in question .
(') OJ No C 262, 7. 10 . 1995 , p . 11 .                                (') OJ No L 279, 12 . 11 . 1993 , p . 32 .