CELEX: C1997/271/27
Language: en
Date: 1997-09-06 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 5 June 1997 by Società Camar s.r.l. against Commission of the European Communities (Case T-172/97)

C 271 / 16             I EN I               Official Journal of the European Communities                                     6 . 9 . 97
2 . dismisses the claim for compensation;                              Action brought on 5 June 1997 by Societa Camar s.r.l.
                                                                            against Commission of the European Communities
3 . holds that there is no need to give a decision on the                                       (Case T-l 72/97)
     claim for default interest;
                                                                                                 ( 97/C 271 /27 )
4 . orders the defendant to pay all the costs.
                                                                                        (Language of the case: Italian)
(') OJ C 351 , 30 . 12 . 1995 .
                                                                       An action against the Commission of the European
                                                                       Communities was brought before the Court of First
                                                                       Instance of the European Communities on 5 June 1997 by
                                                                       Societa Camar s.r.l ., represented by Wilma Viscardini
                                                                       Dona, assisted by Mariano Paolin and Simonetta Dona, of
     ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE                              the Padua Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg
                            of 3 July 1997                             at the Chambers of Ernst Arendt, Rue Mathias Hardt.
in Case T-201 /96: Smanor SA and Others v. Commission
               of the European Communities (')
                                                                       The applicant claims that the Court should:
(Failure to bring Treaty infringement proceedings —
Action for declaration of failure to act — Action for
                   damages — Inadmissibility)                          — declare, pursuant to Article 175 of the EC Treaty, that,
                            ( 97/C 271/26 )                                 by failing to provide that the licences for importing
                                                                            bananas from non-member countries or non­
                                                                           traditional ACP countries to be allocated to Camar as
                 (Language of the case: French)                             a Category B operator during 1997 and for subsequent
                                                                           years pending restoration of its normal reference
                                                                            quantities should be calculated on the basis of the
In Case T-201/96 : Smanor SA, established at Saint-Martin­
                                                                            quantities which Camar marketed in 1988 , 1989 and
d'Ecublei (France), Hubert Segaud and Monique Segaud,                       1990, the Commission has breached Article 30 of
residing at Saint-Martin-d'Ecublei , represented by                         Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 404/93 and the second
Laurence Roques, of the Val de Marne Bar, 7—9 Rue du                        subparagraph of Article 40 ( 3 ) of the EC Treaty,
General de Larminat, Creteil ( France ), v. Commission of
the European Communities ( Agents : Richard Wainwright
and Jean-Francis Pasquier) — application, first, for a
declaration that, in failing to bring Treaty infringement              — order the Commission, pursuant to Article 178 and
proceedings against the French Republic under Article 169                  the second paragraph of Article 215 of the EC Treaty,
of the EC Treaty, the Commission has failed to act, and,                   to pay compensation for the damage which the
second, for damages for the loss flowing from that failure                 applicant has suffered by reason of the Commission's
— the Court of First Instance ( Second Chamber),                           failure,
composed of: C. W. Bellamy, President; B. Vesterdorf and
A. Kalogeropoulos, Judges; H. Jung, Registrar, made an
order on 3 July 1997, the operative part of which is as                — order the Commission to pay the costs incurred by the
follows :                                                                  applicant in these proceedings .
1 . The action is dismissed as inadmissible;
                                                                       Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
2 . There is no need for a ruling on the application for
     leave to intervene;                                               The applicant company is the same as that in Case T-79/
                                                                       96 ( 1 ). It should first be pointed out in this regard, for
3 . The applicants are ordered to bear their own costs and             purposes of clarity, that while in Case T-79/96 Camar is
     to pay the costs of the Commission;                               seeking licences for additional imports from non-member
                                                                       countries as a Category B operator to replace the Somali
                                                                       bananas which it is unable to import vis-a-vis its
4 . The French Republic is ordered to bear the costs                   traditional quantity, the applicant is in the present action
     incurred by it in connection with the submission of its           requesting that the licences for non-member countries
    application for leave to intervene.                                normally allocated to it as a Category B operator should
                                                                       be quantified, not on the basis of the imports over three
                                                                       years as provided for under Article 4 of Commission
(') OJ C 54, 22 . 2 . 1997.
                                                                       Regulation ( EEC ) No 1442/93 , but on the basis of imports
                                                                       in 1988 , 1989 and 1990 . For 1997, the three-year period
                                                                       provided for under Article 4 of that regulation consists of
 ---pagebreak--- 6 . 9 . 97          I EN I               Official Journal of the European Communities                                 C 271 /17
the years 1993 , 1994 and 1995 , which are not                      The applicant claims that the Court should:
representative of the applicant's true capacity for
importing from ACP countries, whereas the three years
                                                                    — annul the Commission decision of 5 March 1997
 1988 , 1989 and 1990 represent the last period during
which Camar was able to operate under normal                             rejecting complaint No R/1691 /96 lodged by the
conditions .                                                             applicant,
                                                                    — order the Commission to compensate the applicant for
The applicant accepts that the absence of Somali bananas                 the material and non-material damage which he
 by reason of the war and the subsequent crisis is outwith               suffered as a result of the conduct complained of in
the Commission's control. That, however, does not release                such an amount as the Court may consider to be
the defendant from responsibility for having failed to take              equitable,
cognizance of the fact that, up to 1995 , there was a
shortfall in Community supply corresponding to the
60 000 tonnes set out in the Annex to Council Regulation            — order the unsuccessful party to pay the costs.
 ( EEC ) No 404/93 as traditional quantities, and that since
 1995, although exports of bananas from Somalia have
resumed, the quantities imported into the Community still           Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
fall appreciably below the traditional quantity. The
Commission's liability stems from the fact that, although           The applicant, a Grade B 4 official working at the Joint
it had at its disposal the necessary powers conferred by            Research Institute in Ispra, contests the decision of the
the Council, it did not make use of them and thereby                Promotions Committee not to include his name on the list
adversely affected not only the general interests of the            of officials most eligible to be promoted to Grade B 3 in
Community but also the specific interest of Camar in its            the 1996 budgetary year.
capacity as a traditional importer of Somali bananas into
the Community.
                                                                    The applicant places specific emphasis in this regard on
                                                                    the delay in compiling his staff report for the period July
Camar takes the view that, although failing to increase the         1993 to June 1995, which was not forwarded to him until
tariff quota for non-member countries to take account of            25 February 1997. That delay deprived him of the
the deficit attributable to Somali bananas, as provided for         opportunity to be included on the abovementioned list of
under Article 16 ( 3 ) of Regulation ( EEC ) No 404/93 , and        officials eligible for promotion. The absence of that
allocating to Camar the portion of that increase to which           periodic staff report prevented the appointing authority
it was entitled, the Commission ought at least to have              from taking full cognizance of his qualities and work
taken the necessary measures pursuant to Article 30 of              capacity. That fact had a decisive bearing, in negative and
that regulation to adjust its reference quantities in order to      preclusive terms, on the promotions procedure .
allow Camar to obtain larger licences for importing
bananas from non-member countries as a Category B
operator. The applicant interprets this omission as                 The applicant points out that during his first 16 years in
constituting a breach of the principle of non­                      Grade B 4, which he has occupied for some 21 years, his
discrimination .                                                    work was distinguished by professionalism and
                                                                    conscientiousness, as is moreover confirmed by the staff
                                                                    reports concerning those periods. It is for that reason
(') Case T-79/96 Camar v. Commission ( OJ C 233 , 10 . 8 . 1996 ,   difficult to believe that for some 16 years of work all the
     p. 13 ).                                                       officials eligible for promotion in the same way as the
                                                                    applicant have always proved to be more meritorious on a
                                                                    comparative examination of their merits and staff reports.
                                                                    In support of his submissions, the applicant puts forward
                                                                    the following grounds :
Action brought on 6 June 1997 by Augusto Fichtner
    against the Commission of the European Communities              — abuse of power based on discrimination,
                       ( Case T-l 73/97)
                         ( 97/C 271/28 )                            — breach and misapplication of Article 24 of the Staff
                                                                        Regulations,
                (Language of the case: Italian)
                                                                    — breach of substantive forms,
An action against the Commission of the European                    — breach of Article 43 of the Staff Regulations and its
Communities was brought before the Court of First                       implementing provisions.
Instance of the European Communities on 6 June 1997 by
Augusto Fichtner, represented by Vincenzo Salvatore, of
the Pavia Bar, 6 Via Orrigoni, Varese ( Italy ).