CELEX: C1995/333/31
Language: en
Date: 1995-12-09 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 3 October 1995 by Nutria AE against the Commission of the European Communities (Case T-180/95)

No C 333/ 16          EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                      9 . 12 . 95
The pleas and main arguments are the same as those                   First Instance on 3 October 1995 by Nutria AE, a company
advanced by the applicant in Case T-66/95 Kuchlenz­                  governed by Greek law, having its registered office in Agios
Winter v. Commission .                                               Konstantinos, Fthiotida ( Greece ), represented by
                                                                     Konstantinos Adamadopoulos, of the Athens Bar, with an
                                                                     address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of
                                                                     Arsene Kronshagen, 12 Boulevard de la Foire .
Action brought on 5 September 1995 by Hedwig
Kuchlenz-Winter against the Council of the European                  The applicant claims that the Court should :
                               Union
                       ( Case T-167/95 )
                          ( 95/C 333/30 )
                                                                     1 . order the Commission to pay it compensation of
                                                                           Dr 288 304 629 plus default interest at the rate of 29 %
                                                                           from 5 December 1994 for actual losses and lost profits
               (Language of the case: German)                              suffered in the olive oil marketing year 1994/95 caused
                                                                           by the unlawful conduct of the Commission;
An action against the Council of the European Union was
brought before the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities on 5 September 1995 by Hedwig                            2 . order the Commission to pay it compensation of
Kuchlenz-Winter, residing at Kehlen ( Luxembourg ),                        Dr 82 500 000 for the damage suffered by the applicant
represented by Dieter Rogalla, Rechtsanwalt, Sprockhovel                   by reason of the harm to its commercial reputation
( Federal Republic of Germany ), with an address for service               caused by the unlawful conduct of the Commision;
in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Armin Machmer, 1 Rue
Roger Barthel, Bereldange .
                                                                     3 . order the Commission to pay the costs .
The applicant claims that the Court should :
— declare that the Council has unlawfully failed to act in
    relation to the applicant, inasmuch as, following the            Pleas in law and main arguments:
    pension rights adjustment effected in the applicant's
    favour pursuant to paragraph 1587 et seq. of the
    Biirgerliches Gesetzbuch ( German Civil Code ), the              The applicant is a company which mass-produces and
    applicant should not have been excluded from the                 markets agricultural products . It took part in the tendering
    sickness insurance scheme; the defendant omitted to              procedure announced by the Commission of the European
    prevent that from happening, in that it unlawfully failed,       Communities for the despatch of 3 000 tonnes of olive oil to
    within the framework of its powers in relation to the            the people of Georgia and Armenia on the basis of
    scheme , to propose to the competent EC institutions the         Commission Regulations ( EEC ) Nos 2494/94 and 2693/94
    corresponding amendments to the Staff Regulations of             and succeeded in being awarded the supply of 1 500 tonnes
    Officials,                                                       of olive oil . The applicant maintains that because of the
                                                                     two-month delay in taking over the goods on the part of the
— order the defendant to pay the costs .                             transporter, the choice of which was the sole responsibility
                                                                     of the Commission under Regulation ( EC ) No 2693/94, it
Pleas in law and main arguments:                                     suffered significant losses and lost profits . In particular the
                                                                     applicant claims, on the basis of Articles 178 and the second
The pleas and main arguments advanced by the applicant               paragraph of Article 215 of the Treaty: ( a ) compensation for
are   the   same   as    those    invoked  in   Case   T-66/95       the actual losses suffered, that is to say the warehousing and
Kuchlenz-Winter v. Commission and in Case T-l 64/95                  supervision charges paid during the period of the delay; ( b )
Kuchlenz-Winter v. Parliament.                                       lost profits, in view of the fact that the security lodged in the
                                                                     context of the tendering procedure with the Commission
                                                                     could not be released, with the result that the applicant
                                                                     could not obtain financing to carry out commercial
                                                                     transactions on the market and resell quantities of olive oil
                                                                     at a period that is extremely crucial for the olive oil market;
Action brought on 3 October 1995 by Nutria AE against the            ( c ) default interest on the amount of the actual losses and
        Commission of the European Communities                       lost profits at the interest rate prevailing in Greece ( 29 % );
                       ( Case T-180/95                               and ( d ) lost profits on the ground of the harm to its
                                                                     commercial reputation and consequent loss of customers in
                          ( 95/C 333/31 )                            the commercial year 1995/96 .
                (Language of the case: Greek)
An action for damages against the Commission of the
European Communities was brought before the Court of