CELEX: C2000/355/80
Language: en
Date: 2000-12-09 00:00:00
Title: Case T-318/00: Action brought on 10 October 2000 by Freistaat Thüringen against the Commission of the European Communities

C 355/38               EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                       9.12.2000
In support of its arguments, the applicant puts forward the              Pleas in law and main arguments
following pleas in law:
—     Inadequate and contradictory statement of reasons.
                                                                         The contested decision of the Commission concerns a number
                                                                         of alleged cases of aid received by various undertakings in
—     Misuse of powers and infringement of Council Regulation
                                                                         connection with the establishment and operation of a CD
      (EEC) No 4064/89 of 21 December 1989 on the control
                                                                         factory in Albrechts, Thuringia. In the decision the Com-
      of concentrations between undertakings (1).
                                                                         mission finds that part of that aid was misused. It states that
                                                                         that wrong use constitutes an abuse of aid, which is therefore
The applicants point out in that regard that the contested               incompatible with the EC Treaty. In Article 2 of the contested
decision relies on a number of statements of principle and of            decision the Federal Republic of Germany is ordered to recover
fact which are arbitrary, or in any event unfounded. In                  the aid from more precisely specified recipients.
particular, the defendant appears to have confused the appli-
cation of the rules of competition with structural intervention
on the basis of economic policy which fall beyond its powers,
thus losing sight of the fact that the recent significant oil price      The applicant considers that it is directly and immediately
rises are in fact the result of factors altogether beyond the            concerned by the decision. On the basis of the German rules
control of undertakings.                                                 of national law, the contested decision is to be implemented
                                                                         by the applicant, in so far as undertakings established in
                                                                         Thuringia are concerned. Furthermore, the contested decision
(1) OJ 1989 L 395, p. 1.                                                 largely concerns alleged aid distributed by the Thuringian
                                                                         authorities. Moreover, the order to recover the aid relates to
                                                                         undertakings which are indirectly owned by the applicant.
                                                                         The applicant complains that the Commission partly incor-
                                                                         rectly classified the measures in question as State aid. Moreover,
                                                                         the undertakings established in Thuringia were incorrectly
Action brought on 10 October 2000 by Freistaat Thüring-                  identified as recipients of aid for the purposes of recovery.
en against the Commission of the European Communities                    CDA Datenträger Albrechts GmbH received no benefit from
                                                                         State resources. The applicant’s other undertakings were also
                          (Case T-318/00)                                ultimately deprived of the finance as a result of fraudulent
                                                                         dealings. This applies to Pilz & Robotron GmbH & Co.
                                                                         Beteiligungs KG, Pilz Albrechts GmbH, CDA Compact Disc
                         (2000/C 355/80)                                 Albrechts GmbH and hence finally also Logistik Center
                                                                         Albrechts GmbH. Consequently, the Commission could extend
                                                                         the instruction to recover the aid only to those undertakings
                   (Language of the case: German)                        which actually received a benefit.
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the               In this context the applicant puts forward the following pleas
European Communities on 10 October 2000 by Freistaat                     in law in particular:
Thüringen (State of Thuringia), represented by Dr Michael
Schütte, Rechtsanwalt, of Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer,
Brussels.                                                                —     Breach of the principle of the right to a fair hearing
The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                         —     Errors in establishing the facts
—     annul the contested decision;
      in the alternative:                                                —     Defective statement of reasons
      —    annul Article 1(1) of the contested decision in so far
           as aid to Pilz & Robotron GmbH & Co. Beteiligungs             —     Infringement of the requirement of precision and the
           KG and Pilz Albrechts GmbH is thereby declared                      principle of proportionality
           incompatible with the common market;
      —    annul Articles 1(2) and 2(3) of the contested                 —     Unlawfulness of the instruction to recover the aid
           decision;
—     order the Commission of the European Communities to                —     Manifestly incorrect assessment of the individual elements
      pay the costs.                                                           of aid
 ---pagebreak--- 9.12.2000             EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                      C 355/39
—     Errors in the assessment of the legal consequences to be          The present action is for compensation for the damage which
      derived from the wrongful use of the aid granted                  the applicant has suffered, or has yet to suffer in the future, as
                                                                        a result of those penal tariffs.
—     Infringement of Article 87(1) EC in conjunction with
      Article 88(2) EC                                                  In the applicant’s submission, by issuing Regulation (EC)
                                                                        No 1637/98 (1) and Regulation (EC) No 2362/98 (2) otherwise
                                                                        than in conformity with the WTO and by not adapting the
                                                                        Community organisation of the market in bananas, the
                                                                        defendants have infringed the law of the World Trade Organis-
                                                                        ation. Those infringements must be taken into account in
                                                                        Community law. That follows, first, from the fact that the
                                                                        reformed organisation of the market in bananas is intended to
                                                                        transpose WTO law, and, secondly, from the very nature of
Action brought on 12 October 2000 by CD Cartondruck                     WTO law and the compulsory disputes resolution mechanism
GmbH & Co. KG against the Council of the European                       itself. The applicant further maintains that the defendants’
Union and the Commission of the European Communities                    conduct infringes the principle of the protection of legitimate
                                                                        expectations, the right to engage freely in economic activity,
                                                                        the right to property and the prohibition of discrimination.
                        (Case T-320/00)                                 The applicant maintains that, in relation to all those infringe-
                                                                        ments, the Commission and the Council acted negligently.
                        (2000/C 355/81)                                 Finally, in the alternative, the applicant also makes a claim for
                                                                        compensation in respect of lawful Community conduct.
                  (Language of the case: German)                        (1) Council Regulation (EC) No 1637/98 of 20 July 1998 amending
                                                                            Regulation (EEC) No 404/93 on the common organisation of the
                                                                            market in bananas (OJ 1998 L 210, p. 28).
An action against the Council of the European Union and                 (2) Commission Regulation (EC) No 2362/98 of 28 October 1998
the Commission of the European Communities was brought                      laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council
before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities              Regulation (EEC) No 404/93 regarding imports of bananas into
on 12 October 2000 by CD Cartondruck GmbH & Co. KG,                         the Community (OJ 1998 L 293, p. 32).
Obersulm (Germany), represented by H.-J. Niemeyer and
W. Berg, Rechtsanwälte, Brussels.
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—     order the defendants jointly and severally to pay
      the applicant damages of DEM 1 693 727,75 (EUR
      865 989,22) plus 8 % interest from 13 July 2000;                  Action brought on 16 October 2000 by CDA Datenträger
                                                                        Albrechts GmbH against the Commission of the European
—     declare the defendants jointly and severally liable for the                                 Communities
      damage which the applicant will suffer subsequently to
      the bringing of its action by virtue of the fact that the                                  (Case T-324/00)
      competent authorities of the United States of America
      levy higher duties on the applicant’s products than those
      which they would have been entitled to levy if, through                                    (2000/C 355/82)
      the organisation of the market in bananas, the Council
      had not infringed the law of the World Trade Organis-
      ation;                                                                               (Language of the case: German)
—     order the defendants to pay the costs.                            An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
                                                                        ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
                                                                        European Communities on 16 October 2000 by CDA Daten-
Pleas in law and main arguments                                         träger Albrechts GmbH, of Albrechts, Germany, represented
                                                                        by Dr Thomas Schmidt-Kötters, Rechtsanwalt, of Hengeler
                                                                        Mueller Weitzel Wirtz, Düsseldorf, Germany.
The applicant manufactures printed and processed collapsible
cardboard cartons for proprietary products, largely intended
for the US market. As a result of the trade dispute between the         The applicant claims that the Court should:
European Community and the USA as to the compatibility of
the EC organisation of the market in bananas with the law of            —      annul Articles 1 and 2 of the Commission’s decision of
the World Trade Organisation, the USA imposed penal tariffs,                   21 June 2000 on aid by Germany to CDA Compact Disc
which also affect the products of the applicant.                               Albrechts GmbH, Thuringia;