CELEX: C1996/197/40
Language: en
Date: 1996-07-06 00:00:00
Title: JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE of 22 May 1996 in Case T-277/94: Associazione Italiana Tecnico Economica del Cemento (AITEC) v. Commission of the European Communities (Decision declaring State aid unlawful - Requests for initiation of Treaty infringement proceedings - Rejected - Action for annulment of measures - Decision - Inadmissible - Action for declaration of failure to act - Inadmissible)

6 . 7. 96              EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                No C 197/19
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE                               of the European Communities on 25 April 1996 by Partex,
                        of 22 May 1996                                Companhia Portuguesa de Serviços SA, whose registered
                                                                      office is in Lisbon, represented by Rui Chancerelle de
in     Case   T-277/94 :      Associazione   Italiana   Tecnico
                                                                      Machete, Pedro Machete e Miguel Pena Machete, of the
Economica del Cemento (AITEC ) v. Commission of the                   Lisbon Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at
                   European Communities i 1 )                         the Chambers of Louis Schiltz, 2 rue du Fort
(Decision declaring State aid unlawful — Requests for                 Rheinsheim .
initiation of Treatyinfringementproceedings — Rejected—
Action for annulment of measures — Decision —
Inadmissible — Action for declaration of failure to act —
                           Inadmissible)                              The applicant claims that the Court should:
                          ( 96/C 197/40 )
                 (Language of the case: Italian)                      — declare the action to be admissible and, accordingly,
                                                                          annul the decision of the Commission approving the
In Case T-277/94 : Associazione Italiana Tecnico Economica                final payment claim for the balance of file
del Cemento ( AITEC ), established in Rome, represented by                No 88 0412 P3 of the European Social Fund,
Mario Siragusa, of the Rome Bar, Giuseppe
Scassellati-Sforzolini, of the Bologna Bar, and Cesare Rizza,
of the Syracuse Bar, with an address for service in
Luxembourg at the Chambers of Elvinger, Hoss & Prussen,               — order the Commission to pay the costs.
15 côte d'Eich, v . Commission of the European
Communities ( agents : Nicola Annecchino and Ben
Smulders ) — application for annulment of decision
D/05268 of the Commission of 9 June 1994, inasmuch as it              Pleas in law and main arguments:
expresses the Commission's refusal to bring an action before
the Court of Justice under the second subparagraph of
Article 93 ( 2 ) of the Treaty on account of the Greek                The applicant, a Portuguese service provider which
Government's failure to comply with Commission Decision               organized and put into operation in 1988 a vocational
91 /144/EEC of 2 May 1990 on aid granted by the Greek                 training programme intended for three undertakings,
Government to a cement manufacturer (Halkis Cement
                                                                      challenged the Commission's refusal to declare eligible for
Company ) ( OJ L 73 , 1991 , p . 27 ) and, in addition,               the European Social Fund certain expenditure in connection
annulment of the confirmation of that refusal, expressed in           with that training programme (ESF file No 88 0412 P3 ) .
decision D/07743 of 26 July 1994 , together, in the
alternative, with a declaration that the Commission has
failed to act — the Court of First Instance ( Second Chamber,
Extended Composition ), composed of H. Kirschner,                     The applicant claims in the first place that Article 190 of the
President, and B. Vesterdorf, C. W. Bellamy, A.                       Treaty was infringed since the contested decision does not
Kalogeropoulos and A. Potocki , Judges; J. Palacio                    state any reasons which would enable the applicant to
Gonzalez, Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a               understand the grounds for the refusal .
judgment on 22 May 1996 , in which it:
1 , dismisses the action as inadmissible;                             The applicant complains, moreover, that the Commission,
                                                                      by adopting the contested decision, changed an initial
2 , orders the applicant to bear its own costs and to pay the         decision which was favourable to the training projects in
      costs of the Commission.                                        question, and that it had certified the expenditure incurred
                                                                      by the DAFSE in 1988 . In particular, the defendant
f 1 ) OJ No C 304, 29 . 10 . 1994 .                                   institution cannot reasonably ask for the repayment of the
                                                                      amounts at issue in respect of expenditure incurred in the
                                                                      context of a project approved and carried out eight years
                                                                      previously. By its conduct, the Commission breached,
                                                                      moreover, the applicable Community rules . Under Article 5
                                                                      of Regulation ( EEC ) No 2950/83 , the factual and
Action brought on 25 April 1996 by Partex, Companhia                  accounting verification must be carried out within a
Portuguesa de Serviços SA, against the Commission of the              time-limit of 13 months, as provided for in Decision
                    European Communities                               83/673/EEC . Since, according to settled case-law, this
                         ( Case T-58/96 )                             constitutes a time-bar, it is evident that there could have
                           ( 96/C 197/41 )                             been no valid reexamination in the present case .
              (Language of the case: Portuguese)
 An action against the Commission of the European
 Communities was brought before the Court of first Instance