CELEX: C1995/351/29
Language: en
Date: 1995-12-30 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 18 October 1995 by Comafrica SpA and Dole Fresh Fruit Europe Ltd & Co. against the Commission of the European Communities (Case T-198/95)

30 . 12 . 95           EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                No C 351 / 15
Action brought on 18 October 1995 by Comafrica SpA and                 Action brought on 20 October 1995 by Le Nouveau Garage
Dole Fresh Fruit Europe Ltd & Co. against the Commission               SA and Others against the Commission of the European
                 of the European Communities                                                     Communities
                        ( Case T-198/95 )                                                     ( Case T-l 99/95 )
                          ( 95/C 351 /29 )                                                      ( 95/C 351 /30 )
                (Language of the case: English)                                        (Language of the case: French)
An action against the Commission of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First                      An action against the Commission of the European
Instance of the European Communities on 1 8 October 1995               Communities was brought before the Court of First
by Comafrica SpA and Dole Fresh Fruit Europe Ltd & Co .,               Instance of the European Communities on 20 October 1995
                                                                       by Le Nouveau Garage SA, established at Pierre Benite
represented by Mr. Bernard O'Connor, with an address for
service in Luxembourg at the offices of Arsene Kronshagen,             ( France ), Max Labat Automobiles 17, established at Royan
rue Marie Adelaide 22 .                                                ( France ) and Riviera Auto Service, established at Nice
                                                                       ( France ), represented by Christian Bourgeon, of the
                                                                       Paris Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg
The applicant claims that the Court should :                           at the Chambers of Decker & Braun , 16 Avenue
                                                                       Marie-Therese .
— declare the application admissible,
— declare void, pursuant to Articles 173 , 174 and 184 of              The applicants claim that the Court should :
    the EC Treaty, Regulation ( EC ) No 1869/95 in so far as
    it affects the applicants, or alternatively, to declare the        — declare pursuant to Article 175 of the Treaty that the
    said Regulation void erga omnes,                                        Commission has failed to take a decision in relation to
                                                                            the complainant companies, despite the fact that they
— order the Commission, pursuant to Article 178 and the                     submitted in advance, and in good time, a request that it
    second paragraph of Article 215 of the EC Treaty, to                    should do so,
    make good any damage, and interest thereon, caused to
    the applicants by the wrongful adoption of Regulation              — order the Commission to pay the costs .
    ( EC ) No 1869/95 ,
— make any additional orders which the Court considers                 Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
    necessary for the purposes of determining the damage
    caused to the applicants,                                          The applicants, three former Volkswagen & Audi
                                                                       concessionaires, currently in the process of recovery or in
— declare that the Commission pays the costs incurred by               compulsory liquidation, allege that the Commission failed
    the applicants in making this application .                        to act on complaints which they submitted to it concerning
                                                                       the application by VAG France, throughout the whole of
                                                                       France, of an exclusive and selective system for the
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                    distribution of new vehicles of the aforementioned makes
                                                                       and of spare parts for those vehicles , according to which the
The applicants, both of whom import bananas into the                   delivery of new vehicles and spare parts is reserved to
Community, attack the decisions of the Commission to                   selected retailers .
reduce the quantity of bananas allocated to them for the
year of 1995 through the application of a definitive
reduction coefficient set out in Commission Regulation                 They consider in that regard that the dealership agreements
( EC ) No 1869/95 of 25 July 1995 . The grounds on which               at issue, and the terms on which those agreements are
the applicants rely are similar to those raised in Case                applied, are not in accordance with the criteria governing
T-72/95 ('), in which they challenged the provisional                  eligibility for the block exemption arising from Regulation
reduction coefficient for 1995 , fixed by Commission                   ( EEC ) No 123/85 , and are not eligible . for individual
Regulation ( EC ) No 2947/94 .                                         exemption either.
With regard to the claim for damages, the applicants                   Following preliminary inquiries, at the end of which the
maintain that the Commission has breached a superior rule              defendant institution sent to VAG France a statement of
of law for the protection of the individual, that the                  objections, an inter partes hearing took place on
infringement is sufficiently serious and that such breach has          8 November 1994 . Although the investigation of the
caused damage to them .                                                complaints appears to have been concluded, the
                                                                       Commission has still not yet given its decision in the
                                                                       matter .
(') OJ No C 268 , 14 . 10 . 1995 , p . 23 .