CELEX: C1995/299/25
Language: en
Date: 1995-11-11 00:00:00
Title: Removal from the register of Case C-403/93

11.11.95            lENl                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                 No C 299/ 15
      Removal from the register of Case C-403 /93 ( 1 )                 C-403/93 ( reference for a preliminary ruling from the
                           W/C 299/25 )                                 Regional Office of the Industrial Tribunals , London South ):
                                                                        M. J. C. 1 \ ans and the Executors of Priscilla Jane Evans v.
 By order of 15 September 1995 the President of the Sixth               Metropolitan Police Authority .
 Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European
 Communities ordered the removal from the register of Case              (') ()) No C 29.5 , 29 . 10 . 1993 .
                                                      COURT OF FIRST INSTANCI
Action brought on 11 August 1995 by Eridania Zuccherifici                   Regulation ( EEC ) No 1785/81 of 30 June 1981 and
Nazionali SpA and others against the Council of the                         successive amendments thereto , at least as regards
                    European Communities                                    Article 8 thereof, where it provides that the
                        ( Case T- 15 8 /95 )                                reimbursement in question is to be the same for the
                          ( 95/C 299/26 )
                                                                            whole Community ( Whilst the unlawfulness of that
                                                                            prov ision might be mitigated by the presence at the same
                                                                            time of the principle contained in Article 46 ( 4 ), such
                ( Language of the case: Italian)                            unlawfulness is manifest where even that modest
                                                                            corrective provision is absent ),
An action against the Council of the European Communities
was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
                                                                       — make any such further ruling as may be necessary in the
European Communities on 11 August 1995 by Eridania                          circumstances ,
Zuccherifici Nazionali SpA, with its registered office in
Genoa , and Industria Saccarifera Italiana Agroindustriale
SpA , with its registered office in Padua ( the                        — award costs in favour of the applicants .
Eridania-Zuccherifici Nazionali SpA Group ); Societa
Sadam      Zuccherifici ,    a  division   of   Societa   Esercizi
Commerciali Industriali SpA, Societa Sadam Castiglionese               Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
SpA and Societa Sadam Abruzzo SpA , all registered in
Bologna , and Societa Zuccherificio del Molise SpA, with its
registered office in Termoli ( the Sadam Zuccherifici Group );         A number of Italian sugar companies challenge the new
Societa Eondiaria Industriale Romagnola SpA , with its                 Community rules on compensation for sugar storage costs
registered office in Cesena , and Societa Ponteco Zuccheri             laid down by Regulations ( EC]) No 1101 /95 and ( EC )
SpA , with its registered office in Pontelagoscuro ( the SEIR          No 1534/95 , at least in so far as they fail to differentiate the
Group ), represented by Bernard O'Connor, Solicitor of the             amounts of compensatory reimbursement payable by
High Court of Ireland , and by Ivano Vigliotti and Paolo               reference to the financing costs affecting the sugar
                                                                       manufacturers of each Member State .
Crocetta , of the Genoa Bar , with and address for service
in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Arsene Kronshagen ,
12 Boulevard de la Loire .                                             It should be noted in that respect that, in order to avoid a
                                                                       manifestly unlawful result arising from the granting of the
The applicants claim that the Court should :                           same reimbursement to every Community manufacturer
                                                                       without reference to the different financing costs affecting
— annul Regulation ( EC ) No 1 101 /95 of 24 April 1995 , at           eacht of them . Regulation ( EEC ]) No 1785 / 81 contained a
    least in so far as , in amending Regulation ( EEC])                provision in Article 46 ( 4 ), always repeated in subsequent
    No 1785/81 , it does not provide for differentiation of            amendments , whereby ' the Italian Republic shall be
    the compensatory reimbursement for storage costs by­               authorized , when the interest rate granted in Italy to the
    reference to the financing costs affecting the sugar               most solvent applicant is higher, by 3 % or more , than the
    manufacturers of each country ,                                    interest rate used to calculate the reimbursement ( by way of
                                                                       compensation for storage costs ), to cover the effect of this
— annul Regulation ( EC]) No 1534/95 of 29 June 1995 , or              difference on the storage costs by a national aid '. That
    in any event Article 4 thereof, which fixes the amount of          remedy , which was in itself inadequate inasmuch as it
    the reimbursement for the 1995/96 marketing year                   imposed an unjustified threshold of 3% and in any event
    referred to in Article 8 of Regulation ( EEC ]) No 1785/8 1        constituted not a guarantee of higher reimbursement but
    at a single measure without reference to the interest rates        merely the possibility that the Italian Republic might grant
    prevailing in each Member State ,                                  an aid , no longer appears in the new rules which are in
                                                                       dispute . Under the new rules , such reimbursement is fixed
— annul , so far as may be necessary, all other measures in            by reference to an interest rate of 6,75 % , with no provision
    relation to the above/mentioned , whether prior ,                  for differentiation by reference to the financing costs
    subsequent or howsoever connected , including                      affecting sugar manufacturers in each country .