CELEX: C2001/045/42
Language: en
Date: 2001-02-10 00:00:00
Title: Case T-344/00: Action brought on 13 November 2000 by CEVA Santé Animale against the Commission of the European Communities

10.2.2001             EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                       C 45/19
Action brought on 13 November 2000 by CEVA Santé                        —     order the Commission to pay the costs of the present
Animale against the Commission of the European Com-                           proceedings.
                            munities
                                                                        Pleas in law and main arguments
                        (Case T-344/00)
                                                                        The applicant in the present case is a pharmaceutical company
                                                                        which markets a veterinary medicinal product containing the
                         (2001/C 45/42)                                 pharmaceutically active ingredient progesterone. The product
                                                                        marketed by the applicant is used for the purpose of controlling
                                                                        the period of sexual receptivity in cows and breeding mares. It
                                                                        can also be used for the therapeutical treatment of fertility
                                                                        disorders in cows and mares.
                  (Language of the case: English)
                                                                        The applicant states on this point that in December 1999 the
                                                                        Committee for Veterinary Medicinal Products (CVMP), after
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-               examining the information forwarded by the Commission,
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the              confirmed its earlier 1996 recommendation for the inclusion
European Communities on 13 November 2000 by CEVA                        of progesterone in Annex II to Council Regulation (EEC)
Santé Animale, having its registered office in Libourne, France,        No 2377/90, of 26 June 1990, laying down a Community
represented by Denis Waelbroeck and Dirk Brinckman, of                  procedure for the establishment of maximum residue limits
Liedekerke Siméon Wessing Houthoff, Brussels.                           of veterinary medicinal products in foodstuffs of animal
                                                                        origin (1).Thus there appeared to be no further reason for the
                                                                        Commission to continue blocking the procedure for the
                                                                        inclusion of progesterone in the above-mentioned Annex II.
The applicant claims that the Court should:                             However, despite a renewed oral assurance by the Commission
                                                                        in October 2000 that a regulation including progesterone in
                                                                        this Annex II would be adopted without delay, no further
—    declare pursuant to Article 232 EC that the Commission             action has been undertaken by the Commission since then.
     has failed to comply with its obligations under Com-
     munity law by failing to take the necessary measures for
                                                                        In support of its claims, the applicant submits as follows:
     the inclusion of progesterone in Annex II to Regulation
     No 2377/90 following the issuing of the positive opinion
     of the CVMP and in particular to draw up a draft                   —     In breach of its obligations under Regulation No 2377/90,
     regulation including progesterone in Annex II and sub-                   especially Article 7(5) and (6) thereof, the Commission
     mitting it to the Standing Committee for approval;                       has failed to act;.
                                                                        —     In breach of the general principle of the protection of
—    order the Community, as represented here by the Com-                     legitimate expectations and the general principle of sound
     mission, to repair the damage suffered by the applicant                  administration, the Commission has failed to act;
     as a result of its unlawful failure to act and to set the
     amount of compensation at EURO 258 453, or at any
     other amount reflecting the damage suffered by the                 —     Its failure to act is not consistent with the authorisation
     applicant as further established by it in the course of                  within the Community of the use of progesterone for
     these proceedings, and especially taking due account of                  therapeutical and zootechnical use or with the recent
     future damage;                                                           initiatives of the Commission confirming that the use of
                                                                              hormonal substances for these purposes should continue
                                                                              to be allowed, and constitutes in reality a misuse of
—    in the alternative, order the parties to produce to the                  powers;
     Court within a reasonable period from the date of the
     judgment figures as to the amount of the compensation              —     The Commission’s failure to act constitutes a breach of
     agreed between the parties or, in the absence of agree-                  the applicant’s fundamental right to pursue its economic
     ment, order the parties to produce to the Court within                   activity and of the principle of proportionality.
     the same period their submissions with detailed figures in
     support;
                                                                        (1) OJ L 224, of 18.8.1990, p. 1.
—    order that interest at the annual rate of 8 %, or any other
     appropriate rate to be determined by the Court, be paid
     on the amount payable as from the date of the Court’s
     judgment until actual payment of that amount;