CELEX: C1995/208/66
Language: en
Date: 1995-08-12 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 11 May 1995 by Miguel Anacoreta Correia against the Commission of the European Communities (Case T-118/95)

12 . 8 . 95            EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                No C 208/31
Action brought on 10 May 1995 by N. Corman SA against                  standardized butter cannot continue without Community
       the Commission of the European Communities                      aid, since its production cost is too high to enable it to find
                         ( Case T-l 17/95 )                            any outlets.
                           ( 95 /C 208/65                              The applicant considers that the defendant institution has
                                                                       breached the principles of legal certainty and the protection
               (Language of the case: French)                          of legitimate expectations, in that it has prevented it, with
                                                                       immediate effect and without any transitional measures,
                                                                       from being able to continue to enjoy the benefit of the
An action against the Commission of the European                       Community rules .
Communities was brought before the Court of First
Instance of the European Communities on 10 May 1995 by                 It also maintains that the contested Regulation contravenes
N. Corman SA, established at Goe-Limbourg ( Belgium ),                 the principle of non-discrimination, in that it does not
represented by Lucette Defalque, of the Brussels Bar, with             impose the same restrictive conditions on the granting of aid
an address for service in Luxembourg at the offices of                 for butter for the homeless, which is eligible for Community
Fiduciaire Myson Sari , 1 Rue Glesener .                               aid regardless of the raw materials used . The applicant
                                                                       contends that that difference in treatment between butter
                                                                       for the homeless and butter for use in pastry products and
The applicant claims that the Court should :                           ice-creams, which did not previously exist, is not objectively
                                                                       justified .
— annul Article 1 (4 ) of Regulation ( EC ) No 455/95 ,
                                                                       Lastly, the applicant asserts that the contested rules
                                                                       disregard both the general Community interest and the
— order the defendant to pay the costs .
                                                                       principle of proportionality, inasmuch as the new restriction
                                                                       on eligibility for Community aid does not accord with the
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                    objective pursued by those rules .
The applicant, a public limited liability company
incorporated under Belgian law and the only manufacturer
in the Union engaged mainly and semi-exclusively in the
production of anhydrous milk fat and 'technical butter',               Action brought on 11 May 1995 by Miguel Anacoreta
contests Article 1 ( 4 ) of Commission Regulation No 455/95            Correia against the Commission of the European
amending Regulations ( EEC ) No 1547/87 and ( EEC ) No                                           Communities
1589/87 as regards the buying-in of butter by the
                                                                                              ( Case T-118/95 )
intervention agencies and Regulations ( EEC ) No 2191 /81
and ( EEC ) No 570/88 as regards the grant of aid for the                                       ( 95/C 208/66 )
purchase and sale of butter at a reduced price to certain
categories of consumers and industries . The objectives of                             (Language of the case: French)
those rules include, in particular, the sale of butter at
reduced prices and the granting of aid for cream, butter and           An action against the Commission of the European
concentrated butter for use in the manufacture of pastry               Communities was brought before the Court of First
products, ice-cream and other food products .                          Instance of the European Communities on 11 May 1995 by
                                                                       Miguel Anacoreta Correia , resident in Brussels, represented
The conditions for obtaining aid laid down by the new rules            by Georges Vandersanden, of the Brussels Bar, with an
are radically different from the old rules, since, instead of          address for service in Luxembourg at the office of Fiduciaire
having to be classed simply as 'inspection-marked butter',             Myson Sari , 1 Rue Glesener .
the butter now has to be 'produced directly and exclusively
from pasteurized cream ' and must satisfy, 'in the                     The applicant claims that the Court should :
manufacturing Member State, the conditions laid down in
Article 6 ( 2 ) of Regulation ( EEC ) No 454/95 and the                — annul the decision of 24 June 1994 rejecting the
requirements of the national quality class listed in Annex II               applicant's candidature for the post ( COM/OOl /94 ) of
to Regulation ( EC ) No 454/95 and the packaging of which is                Deputy Director-General in the Directorate-General for
marked accordingly'.                                                        External Political Relations and annul the appointment
                                                                            to that post of the candidate selected ,
The applicant states that it has discovered a process for
manufacturing butter with a fat content of 82 % , making it            — order the Commission to pay the costs .
possible to obtain a butter which is standardized and stable
and much sought after by customers of the manufacturers of             Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
pastry products; it points out that those standardized
products cannot under any circumstances be manufactured                The applicant states that he was a candidate for the post of
solely from fresh cream. The applicant also states that                Deputy Director-General in the Directorate-General for
the commercial and technical realization of the discovery              External Political Relations ( DG l.A ), which was published
has required considerable investment in research                       on 6 January 1994 ( COM/OOl /94 ). On 24 June 1994 he was
and development, such that the manufacture of such                     told that his candidature for the post in question had not
 ---pagebreak--- No C 208/32           EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                    12 . 8 . 95
been successful; shortly afterwards he learned that an                The applicant claims that the Court should :
external candidate had been appointed to that post. He
therefore lodged a complaint against the decision rejecting           — annul Regulation ( EC ) No 816/92, inasmuch as it does
his candidature, which formed the subject of a decision                   not provide for any award of compensation in respect of
expressly rejecting it.                                                   the suspended proportion of the reference quantity, and ,
                                                                          in addition, award the applicant damages ,
The applicant alleges, first, infringement of Article 25 of the
Staff Regulations of officials of the European Communities,           — order the defendants to pay the costs .
claiming that the decision rejecting his candidature
contained no statement of reasons . Alternatively, he claims          Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
that the reasoning set out in the decision rejecting his              In the present proceedings, the applicant is applying for the
complaint is incorrect, since of the two candidates the one           annulment of Regulation ( EC ) No 816/92, inasmuch as that
selected was not the one who possessed the qualifications             Regulation provides for the reduction of reference
and abilities necessary for performing the duties of that             quantities, without compensation, in the interests of the
post.                                                                 European milk market; he also claims damages pursuant to
                                                                      Article 178 and the second paragraph of Article 215 of the
Furthermore, the applicant points out that he was the only            EC Treaty for the loss suffered by him as a result of the
internal candidate for the post concerned and that the                application of the aforesaid Regulation .
appointing authority should , consequently, have
interviewed him to ascertain, in the light of his                     By virtue of the 24th Order amending the Milch­
qualifications, knowledge , abilities and experience, whether         Garantiemengen-Verordnung ( Milk Guarantee Quantities
he met the conditions required to fill the post. Since such an        Order ), which transposes Regulation ( EC ) No 816/92 into
interview never took place, he considers that his candidature         German law, a partial quantity, constituting 4,74 % of the
was not validly assessed under Article 29 ( 1 ) of the Staff          previous reference quantity, was 'suspended ' with effect
Regulations and that that procedure was not correctly                 from 1 April 1 992 . By contrast with the situation previously
followed with regard to him .                                         prevailing, compensation is now no longer paid . That
                                                                      legislation has the effect of an expropriation measure and is
The applicant also considers that the decision taken by the           incompatible with the basic right to property .
appointing authority not to fill the post at issue using any of
the procedures in Article 29 ( 1 ) of the Staff Regulations, but      Although the Milch-Garantiemengen-Verordnung, which
to follow the exceptional procedure laid down in                      completes Regulation ( EC ) No 816/92, makes provision for
Article 29 (2 ) of the Staff Regulations instead , infringed the      the suspension of quantities, and thus for their withdrawal,
latter provision and also Article 45 of the Staff                     it contains no rules regarding compensation . The same
Regulations .                                                         applies as regards the contested Regulation ( EC ) No 816/92 .
                                                                      Consequently, those provisions infringe Article 14 ( 3 ) of the
Lastly, the applicant claims that even before declaring the           Grundgesetz ( German Basic Law); thus they also
post vacant, the Commission had decided to appoint a                  contravene, by virtue of the foregoing, the right to property
certain person to it. The defendant had therefore committed           enshrined in the legal order of the European Communities,
an abuse of procedure and a misuse of powers; on the same             which is safeguarded in accordance with the constitutional
account it had failed to comply with Articles 7 and 27 of the         conceptions common to the Member States .
Staff Regulations, in so far as those provisions establish the
principle of the prohibition of discrimination in the general         The reduction of the reference quantity without any
rules of the Community civil service and in particular in the         corresponding indemnification or compensation is illegal,
rules governing recruitment procedure .                               since it contravenes the right to property and the principle of
                                                                      the protection of legitimate expectations, and is therefore
                                                                      null and void . Because the applicant has been unable, since
                                                                      the definitive suspension on 29 June 1992 of 4,74 % of his
                                                                      previous reference quantity, to supply 11 612 kg of milk
                                                                      included within that quantity, despite having purchased
Action brought on 12 May 1995 by Alfred Hauer against                 reference quantities of that volume for supply at the then
the Council of the European Union and the Commission of               price of DM 1,60/kg, he has suffered a corresponding loss
                  the European Communities                            for which he should be compensated .
                        ( Case T-119/95 )
                          ( 95/C 208/67 )
               (Language of the case: German)
                                                                      Action brought on 24 May 1995 by Daniel Chabert against
                                                                            the Commission of the European Communities
An action against the Council of the European Union and
the Commission of the European Communities was brought                                       ( Case T-122/95 )
 before the Court of First Instance of the European                                             95/C 208/68 )
 Communities on 12 May 19 95 by Alfred Hauer, of
Niederweiler ( Federal Republic of Germany), represented                              (Language of the case: French)
 by Matthias H. Francois, Rechtsanwalt, Bitburg, with an
 address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of                 An action against the Commission of the European
 Annie k Wurth .                                                       Communities was brought before the Court of First