CELEX: C1996/269/07
Language: en
Date: 1996-09-14 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 21 June 1996 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Hellenic Republic (Case C-211/96)

14 . 9 . 96             EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                       No C 269/3
Action brought on 19 June 1996 by the United Kingdom                            effect therefore it amounts to a penalty, for which there
   against the Commission of the European Communities                           are no express vires.
                         ( Case C-209/96 )
                           ( 96/C 269/06 )                              (') Commission Decision 96/31 1 /EC of 10 April 1996 on the
                                                                              clearance of the accounts presented by the Member States in
                                                                              respect of the expenditure for 1 992 of the Guarantee Section of
                                                                              the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund and
An action against the Commission of the European                              in respect of certain expenditure for 1993 ( OI No L 117, 14 . 5 .
Communities was brought before the Court of Justice of the                    1996 , p. 19 ).
European Communities on 19 June 1996 by the United                      ( 2 ) Commission Regulation ( EEC ) No 2456/93 of 1 September
                                                                              1993 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council
Kingdom, represented by John E. Collins , Assistant                           Regulation ( EEC ) No 805/68 as regards the general and special
Treasury Solicitor, acting as Agent, assisted by Gerald                       intervention measures for beef ( OJ No L 225 , 4 . 9 . 1993 ,
Barling QC and Helen Davies , of the English Bar, with an                     p. 4 ).
address for service in Luxembourg at the British Embassy,               ( ! ) Commission Regulation ( EEC ) No 859/89 of 29 March 1989
14 boulevard Roosevelt .                                                      laying down detailed rules for the application of intervention
                                                                              measures in the beef and veal sector ( OJ No L 91 , 4 . 4 . 1989 ,
                                                                              p. 5 ).
The applicant requests :
— the annulment of the decision ( ) to disallow the sum of
      £ 3 356 000 in respect of the United Kingdom 's
      expenditure for 1992 of. the Guarantee Section of
      the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee                  Action brought on 21 June 1996 by the Commission of the
      Fund,                                                                  European Communities against the Hellenic Republic
                                                                                                    ( Case C-211 /96 )
— an order that the Commission pay the applicant's costs                                              ( 96/C 269/07 )
      of these proceedings .
                                                                        An action against the Hellenic Republic was brought before
                                                                        the Court of Justice of the European Communities on
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                     21 June 1996 by the Commission of the European
                                                                        Communities, represented by Maria Kontou-Durande, of
                                                                        its Legal Service, with an address for service in Luxembourg
                                                                        at the office of Carlos Gomez de la Cruz, also of the
The applicant submits that the decision to make the
disallowance is unlawful for the following reasons :                    Commission's Legal Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
                                                                        The applicant claims that the Court should :
( a ) the approach adopted by the Commission in relation to
       the disallowance was fundamentally flawed in that, in
       contrast to its successor ( 2 ), the Regulation ( 3 ) did not    — declare that, by failing to adopt, within the period
       require the Member States to take steps to ensure                       prescribed, the laws, regulations or administrative
       that connected offers were not accepted , and the                       provisions necessary to comply with Commission
       Commission was wrong as a matter of law to have so                      Directive 93/27/EEC (') of 4 June 1993 amending
       concluded;                                                              Council Directive 70/524/EEC ( 2 ) concerning additives
                                                                               in feedingstuffs, the Hellenic Republic is in breach of its
                                                                               obligations under the Treaty and that Directive,
( b ) in any event, there is no or no sufficient reasoning to
       support the Commission 's conclusions that the practice          — order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs .
       of connected offers either allowed the manipulation by
       tenderers of the intervention procedures or led to a
       higher level of intervention by the national authorities,        Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
       contrary to Article 190 of the Treaty, and such
       conclusions are erroneous in fact . There is moreover no         Under paragraph 3 of Article 189 of the Treaty establishing
       justification for concluding that the practices in               the European Community, a directive is to be binding, as to
       question were liable to lead to that result;                     the result to be achieved , upon each Member State to which
                                                                        it is addressed . Under the first paragraph of Article 5 of the
                                                                        Treaty, the Member States are to take all appropriate
( c ) the imposition of a flat rate disallowance of 2% in               measures, whether general or particular, to ensure
       respect of the accounts of all the Member States is              fulfilment of the obligations arising out the Treaty or
       clearly not related in amount to any loss which is said to       resulting from action taken by the institutions of the
       have been occasioned by the practices identified . In            Community .
 ---pagebreak--- No C 269/4                EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                           14 . 9 . 96
The period prescribed for the transposition of the Directive              for service in Luxembourg at the Belgian Embassy, 4 rue des
in question into national law expired on 31 March 1994 ,                  Girondins .
but the Hellenic Republic has not yet adopted the measures
necessary to incorporate it fully into the Greek legal system,            The applicant claims that the Court should :
nor notified the Commission of any such measures .
                                                                          — annul Commission Regulation ( EC ) No 822/96 of
(') OJ No L 179 , 22 . 7 . 1993 , p . 5 .                                        3 May 1996 on the exceptional allocation of a quantity
( 2 ) Official Journal , English Special Edition 1970 ( III ), p. 840 .          additional to the tariff quota for imports of bananas
                                                                                 during the second quarter of 1996 as a result of tropical
                                                                                 storms Iris , Luis and Marilyn ('),
                                                                          — order the Commission to pay the costs .
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunal
Administratif, Saint-Denis de la Reunion, by judgment of                  Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
that court of 5 June 1996 in the case of Paul
                                                                          The pleas in law and main arguments are analogous to those
     Chevassus-Marche v. Conseil Regional de la Reunion                   in Case C-407/95 ( 2 ).
                           ( Case C-212/96 )
                              ( 96/C 269/08 )                             (') OJ No L 111 , 4 . 5 . 1996 , p . 7 .
                                                                          ( 2 ) OJ No C 46 , 17 . 2 . 1996 , p . 11 .
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by judgment of the Tribunal
Administratif ( Administrative Court ), Saint-Denis de la
Reunion , of 5 June 1996 , which was received at the Court
Registry on 25 June 1996 , for a preliminary ruling in the
case of Paul Chevassus-Marche against Conseil Regional de
                                                                          Action brought on 26 June 1996 by the Commission of the
la Reunion on the following questions :
                                                                           European Communities against the Kingdom of Belgium
                                                                                                      Case C-218/96 )
 1 . Is Council Decision 8 9/6 8 8/EEC ( 1 ) authorizing the                                           ( 96/C 269/ 10 )
       maintenance of dock dues payable on imported
       products and on goods produced by undertakings                     An action against the Kingdom of Belgium was brought
       located in an overseas departement consistent with the
                                                                          before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on
       Treaty and , specifically, with Articles 9 , 12 and 13             26 June 1996 by the Commission of the European
       thereof, in that it allows the possibility of exemptions for
                                                                          Communities , represented by Gotz zur Hausen, acting as
       local undertakings on the sole condition that they
                                                                          Agent, assisted by J. -J. Evrard, Avocat, with an address for
       contribute to the promotion or maintenance of an                   service in Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gomez de la
       economic activity ?
                                                                          Cruz, of the Commission 's Legal Service , Wagner Centre ,
2 . If so , may Decision 89/688/EEC be regarded , in the light            Kirchberg.
       of the second paragraph of Article 95 of the Treaty of
       Rome , as permitting fiscal differentiation with a view to         The applicant claims that the Court should :
       achieving economic objectives which are consistent with
       the requirements of the Treaty and of secondary                    — declare that, by not adopting the laws , regulations and
       legislation, where such differentiation is justified by the               administrative provisions necessary to comply with
       particular economic conditions in the overseas                            Commission Directive 93/ 105/EC (') of 25 November
       departements ?                                                            1 993 laying down Annex VII D , containing information
                                                                                 required for the technical dossier referred to in Article 12
                                                                                 of the     seventh    amendment       of Council     Directive
 (') OJ No L 399 , 30 . 12 . 1989 , p . 46 .
                                                                                 67/548/EEC (2 ), or by not communicating those
                                                                                 measures, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its
                                                                                 obligations under that Directive ,
                                                                          — order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs .
 Action brought on 26 June 1 996 by the Kingdom of Belgium
     against the Commission of the European Communities                    Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
                            ( Case C-2 17/96 )
                                                                           The pleas in law and main arguments are analogous to those
                               ( 96/C 269/09 )                             in Case C-205/96 ( 3 ); the period prescribed by the Directive
                                                                           expired on 31 December 1993 .
 An action against the Commission of the European
 Communities was brought before the Court of Justice of the                (') OJ No L 294 , 30 . 11 . 1993 , p . 21 .
 European Communities on 26 June 1996 by the Kingdom of                    ( 2 ) Official Journal , English Special Edition 1967, p. 234 .
 Belgium, represented by J. Devadder, Adviseur-Generaal in                 (') OJ No C 247, 24 . 8 . 1996 , p . 7 .
 the Ministry of Foreign Affairs , External Trade and
 Development Cooperation , acting as Agent, with an address