CELEX: C1995/229/52
Language: en
Date: 1995-09-02 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 3 July 1995 by Industria del Frío Auxiliar Conservera SA against the Commission of the European Communities (Case T-136/95)

No C 229/24            EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                      2 . 9 . 95
Action brought on 3 July 1995 by Industria del Frio Auxiliar            effect is to modify a situation existing at a specified date,
Conservera SA against the Commission of the European                    date which in any event is that of publication of the
                           Communities                                  measure .
                        ( Case T-136/95 )
                          ( 95/C 229/52 )                               With regard to the claim for compensation, the applicant
                                                                        stresses that it seeks compensation for the loss and harm it
                                                                        has suffered as a consequence of the Commission's act, the
                (Language of the case: Spanish)                         retroactive effects of which infringe sufficiently clearly
                                                                        superior rules of law which protect the applicant's interests,
                                                                        the amount to be increased by appropriate legal interest.
An action against the Commission of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First
Instance of the European Communities on 3 July 1995 by
Industria del Frio Auxiliar Conservera SA, whose registered
office is in Bermeo ( Spain ), represented by Ignacio
Saenz-Cortabarria Fernandez and Marta Morales Isasi,
both of the Vizcaya Bar, with an address for service in
Luxembourg at the Chambers of Guy Harles, 8—10 Rue
Mathias Hardt,                                                          Action brought on 3 July 1995 by Paolo Mozzaglia against
                                                                                 the Commission of the European Communities
                                                                                                  ( Case T-137/95 )
The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                                                    ( 95/C 229/53 )
— annul Commission Decision 95/119/EC of 7 April 1995
    concerning certain protective measures with regard to                                 (Language of the case: Italian)
    fishery products originating in Japan in so far as it affects
    products in transit to the Community,
                                                                        An action against the Commission of the European
— order the European Community to compensate the                        Communities was brought before the Court of First
     applicant for loss and damage resulting from the                   Instance of the European Communities on 3 July 1995 by
     unlawful application of Commission Decision                        Paolo Mozzaglia, represented by Giuseppe Marchesini, a
     95/ 119/EC of 7 April 1995 and fix the amount at Pta                Counsel before the Court of Cassation of the Italian
     18 396 133 pending subsequent settlement based on the              Republic, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the
     sale price of 50 tonnes of frozen 'alalunga ' tuna in Puerto        Chambers of Ernest Arendt, 8— 10 Rue Mathias Hardt.
     Rico, or at least in the amount that the Court consider
     appropriate, increased by statutory interest at the rate of
     9 % and default interest from the date of lodging this              The applicant claims that the Court ahould:
     application,
                                                                         — annul the refusal of the Commission to pay installation
— order the Commission to pay the costs.                                       and daily allowances to the applicant and to reimburse
                                                                               travelling expenses to his place of employment,
 Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                     — declare the above payments owing to the applicant,
                                                                               together with interest at 8 % from the date of the claim
 The applicant claims, first, that the contested decision                      until the date of actual payment,
 prejudices his rights in so far as it infringes general principles
 of Community law, in particular the principles of legal                 — order the Commission to pay the costs .
 certainty and non-retroactivity of laws, protection of
 legitimate expectations, proportionality and equal
 treatment, in not excluding from its scope goods in transit to
 the Community when it entered into force. The applicant                 Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
 claims, secondly, that the Commission has not complied
 with its obligation under Article 190 of the EC Treaty to               The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those in
 state reasons for its acts, since the contested decision                Case T-33/95 ( J ).
 contains a series of contradictions which obscure the real
 reasons which led it to apply the decision retroactively. The
 applicant pleads, finally, abuse of power, claiming that the            i 1 ) OJ No C 101 , 22 . 4 . 1995 , p . 14.
 Commission was not empowered by the Council to apply to
 fishery products originating in Japan a measure prohibiting
 import with retroactive effect since, on the basis of Directive
 90/675 , the Commission may only adopt measures whose