CELEX: C2001/108/10
Language: en
Date: 2001-04-07 00:00:00
Title: Case C-46/01: Action brought on 2 February 2001 by Commission of the European Communities against Italian Republic

C 108/8                EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                     7.4.2001
      law the interests underlying the Ministerial orders. The           Appeal brought on 6 February 2001 by Royal Olympic
      Commission’s claim that Article 21(3) may be understood            Cruises and other companies against the order made on
      as conferring a duty on it to act by way of decision as if         12 December 2000 by the Second Chamber of the Court
      its role as ‘guardian of the treaties’, together with the          of First Instance of the European Communities in Case
      overriding interests of Community law, required such               T-201/99 Royal Olympic Cruises and Others v Council of
      a solution, makes no sense whatever. In fact, if the               the European Union and Commission of the European
      Commission had reason to believe that the Portuguese                                          Communities
      Republic infringed a particular duty to inform, the proper
      procedure, and the only one in this case, was to bring
      infringement proceedings under Article 226 EC.
                                                                                                  (Case C-49/01 P)
(1) OJ 1989 L 395, p. 1.
                                                                                                   (2001/C 108/11)
                                                                         An appeal against the order made on 12 December 2000 by
                                                                         the Second Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the
                                                                         European Communities in Case T-201/99 Royal Olympic
                                                                         Cruises and Others v Council of the European Union and
Action brought on 2 February 2001 by Commission of                       Commission of the European Communities was brought
    the European Communities against Italian Republic                    before the Court of Justice of the European Communities
                                                                         on 6 February 2001 by Royal Olympic Cruises and other
                                                                         companies, represented by Professor N. Skandamis, of the
                          (Case C-46/01)                                 Athens Bar, and A. Potamianos of the Piraeus Bar.
                         (2001/C 108/10)
                                                                         The appellants claim that the Court should:
An action against the Italian Republic was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 2 February
2001 by the Commission of the European Communities,                      —     set aside the order of the Court of First Instance of
represented by Hans Støvlbaek and Roberto Amorosi, acting                      12 December 2000;
as Agents.
                                                                         —     refer back to the Court of First Instance for judgment
The applicant claims that the Court should:                                    the action for damages brought by the appellants on
                                                                               9 September 1999;
—     declare that, by failing to draw up and forward to
      the Commission the appropriate plans, outlines and
      summary inventories necessary to comply with Articles              —     order the Council of the European Union and the
      11 and 4(1) of Council Directive 96/59/EC (1) of 16 Sep-                 European Commission to pay the costs.
      tember 1996 on the disposal of polychlorinated biphe-
      nyls and polychlorinated terphenyls (PC13/PCT), the
      Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under
      those provisions of the directive;and
                                                                         Pleas in law and main arguments
—     order the Italian Republic.
                                                                         1.    Inadequate reasoning: the dismissal of the action for
                                                                               damages as clearly unfounded denied the applicants
Pleas in law and main arguments                                                their procedural right to put forward and to develop
                                                                               sufficiently their arguments concerning a case which is of
The Italian authorities should have taken steps to communicate                 major importance and, in many respects, novel for the
to the Commission the various plans, outlines and summary                      case-law.
inventories, provided for by Articles 11 and 4(1) of the
directive referred to in the Commission’s application, by
16 September 1999. To date, it has not yet done so.                      2.    Misinterpretation of the condition requiring a direct
                                                                               causal link.
(1) OJ L 243, 24.9.1996, p. 31.