CELEX: C2000/047/35
Language: en
Date: 2000-02-19 00:00:00
Title: Case C-465/99 P: Appeal brought on 3 December 1999 by PARTEX, Companhia Portuguesa de Serviços, SA, against the judgment delivered on 16 September 1999 by the Third Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities in Case T-182/96 between PARTEX, Companhia Portuguesa de Serviços, SA, and Commission of the European Communities

19.2.2000               EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                       C 47/21
— order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.                         the Commission. That period expired on 16 March 1998
                                                                        without the Hellenic Republic having communicated to the
                                                                        Commission the provisions transposing the directive at issue
Pleas in law and main arguments                                         into national law.
The Member States are required by the binding character of
the third paragraph of Article 249 EC and of Article 10 EC (ex          (1) OJ L 243 of 24.9.1996, p. 31.
third paragraph of Article 189 and Article 5 of the EC Treaty)
to adopt the measures needed to transpose directives into
national law before the expiry of the period laid down for that
purpose and to communicate those measures immediately to
the Commission. That period expired on 21 May 1998
without the Hellenic Republic having communicated to the
Commission the provisions transposing the directive at issue
into national law.                                                      Appeal brought on 3 December 1999 by PARTEX, Com-
                                                                        panhia Portuguesa de Serviços, SA, against the judgment
                                                                        delivered on 16 September 1999 by the Third Chamber
(1) OJ L 296 of 21.11.1996, p. 55.
                                                                        of the Court of First Instance of the European Communi-
                                                                        ties in Case T-182/96 (1) between PARTEX, Companhia
                                                                        Portuguesa de Serviços, SA, and Commission of the
                                                                                            European Communities
                                                                                               (Case C-465/99 P)
Action brought on 1 December 1999 by the Commission
of the European Communities against the Hellenic Repub-                                          (2000/C 47/35)
                                lic
                                                                        An appeal against the judgment delivered on 16 September
                         (Case C-464/99)                                1999 by the Third Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the
                                                                        European Communities in Case T-182/96 between PARTEX,
                          (2000/C 47/34)                                Companhia Portuguesa de Serviços, SA, and Commission of
                                                                        the European Communities was brought before the Court of
An action against the Hellenic Republic was brought before the          Justice of the European Communities on 3 December 1999 by
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 1 December              PARTEX, Companhia Portuguesa de Serviços, SA, represented
1999 by the Commission of the European Communities,                     by Rui Chancerelle de Machete, Pedro Machete and Miguel
represented by Lena Ström, Legal Adviser in its Legal Service,          Pena Machete, of the Lisbon Bar, with an address for service in
and Panagiotis Panagiotopoulos, a national expert on                    Luxembourg at the Chambers of Louis Schiltz, 2 Rue du Fort
secondment to that service, with an address for service in              Rheinsheim, L-2419 Luxembourg.
Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gómez de la Cruz, of its
Legal Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.                                The appellant claims that the Court should:
The Commission claims that the Court should:                            1. set aside the contested judgment on the ground of error in
                                                                            law in that the legislation applicable to the European Social
— declare that, by not adopting and, as a subsidiary claim,                 Fund (ESF) was incorrectly applied and/or on the ground
    by not communicating to the Commission, within the                      that the decision regarding the existence of abuse of rights
    time-limit laid down the laws, regulations and administrat-             and breach of the rights of the defence, of the principles of
    ive provisions necessary to comply fully with Council                   good faith, of the protection of legitimate expectations and
    Directive 96/59/EC (1) of 16 September 1996 on the                      of acquired rights was wrong as was the decision regarding
    disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls and polychlorinated               misuse of powers, inasmuch as they are based on matters
    terphenyls (PCB/PCT), the Hellenic Republic has failed to               of fact which are materially wrong or inaccurate, reserving,
    fulfil its obligations under the Treaty and that directive;             however, that part of the judgment in which it upheld in
                                                                            part the action brought by PARTEX in Case T-182/96;
— order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.
                                                                        2. accordingly, annul Commission Decision C(96) 1184 of
                                                                            14 August 1996, which was the subject-matter of the
Pleas in law and main arguments                                             action in Case T-182/9, on the ground that the Com-
                                                                            mission infringed the legislation applicable to the ESF;
The Member States are required by the binding character of
the third paragraph of Article 249 EC and of Article 10 EC (ex          3. in the event that it should dismiss the claims set out above,
third paragraph of Article 189 and Article 5 of the EC Treaty)              set aside the contested judgment, reserving, however, that
to adopt the measures needed to transpose directives into                   part of the judgment in which it upheld in part the action
national law before the expiry of the period laid down for that             brought by PARTEX in Case T-182/96, on the ground that
purpose and to communicate those measures immediately to                    it adjudicates on only part of the substance of the case;
 ---pagebreak--- C 47/22               EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                     19.2.2000
4. in the event that it should dismiss the claims set out above,       — The appellant claims that the Court of First Instance failed
    set aside the contested judgment to the extent that it                 to take a decision on the second supplementary ground of
    upholds the decision adopted by the Commission in File                 annulment of the Commission decision contested in
    880412 P3, considering ineligible the entire amount                    Case T-182/96 alleging infringement of the legislation
    requested under sub-headings 14.1.4, 14.2.6, 14.2.7,                   applicable to the ESF (no margin of discretion), put forward
    14.3.1(b) and (c), 14.3.3 and 14.3.5 relating to the ‘Pirites          by the appellant in its reply in that case.
    Alentejanas’ project, sub-headings 14.3.11, 14.3.8 and
    14.9 relating to ‘Tintas Robbialac’ project and sub-heading        — The appellant claims that the Court of First Instance
    14.3.9 relating to the Sapec project, in respect of which              misapplied Article 190 of the EC Treaty (now Article 253
    annulment is sought on the following grounds:                          EC) in respect of sub-headings 14.1.4, 14.2.6, 14.2.7,
                                                                           14.3.1(b) and (c), 14.3.3 and 14.3.5 relating to the ‘Pirites
    — the material inaccuracy of the findings of fact made by              Alentejanas’ project, sub-headings 14.3.11, 14.3.8 and
         the Court of First Instance;                                      14.9 relating to ‘Tintas Robbialac’ project and sub-heading
                                                                           14.3.9 relating to the Sapec project, inasmuch as it based
                                                                           itself on matters of fact which are materially wrong or
    — error in law arising out of inconsistent reasoning;                  inaccurate.
5. accordingly, on those grounds, annul Commission                     — The appellant claims that the Court of First Instance
    Decision C(96) 1184 of 14 August 1996 in so far as it                  committed an error with regard to the existence of abuse
    considers ineligible as a whole, the amounts requested                 of rights and breach of the rights of the defence, of the
    under sub-headings 14.1.4, 14.2.6, 14.2.7, 14.3.1(b) and               principles of good faith, of the protection of legitimate
    (c), 14.3.3 and 14.3.5 relating to the ‘Pirites Alentejanas’           expectations and of acquired rights, inasmuch as it based
    project, sub-headings 14.3.11, 14.3.8 and 14.9 relating to             itself on matters of fact which are materially wrong or
    ‘Tintas Robbialac’ project and sub-heading 14.3.9 relating             inaccurate.
    to the Sapec project;
                                                                       — The appellant submits that the incorrect findings of fact
                                                                           made by the Court of First Instance led it to commit an
6. set aside the third paragraph of the operative part of the
                                                                           error in law in the present case by declaring unfounded
    contested judgment inasmuch as it orders PARTEX to bear
                                                                           the claim as to misuse of powers in the decision contested
    its own costs in Case T-182/96;
                                                                           in Case T-182/96.
7. order the Commission to pay the costs;
                                                                       (1) OJ 1997 C 26, p. 9.
8. uphold as well founded the application for legal aid and,
    accordingly, grant the appellant legal aid in the present
    case.
Pleas and main arguments
                                                                       Action brought on 3 December 1999 by the Commission
— The appellant claims that the Court of First Instance                of the European Communities against the Hellenic Repub-
    committed an error in law by infringing the legislation                                            lic
    applicable to the ESF by finding that in a case such as the
    present case, where a Member State has already certified
    the accuracy of the facts and accounts of the final claim                                  (Case C-467/99)
    for payment, that State may yet alter its assessment of the
    claim in question where it finds irregularities which had
    not become apparent before.                                                                 (2000/C 47/36)
— The appellant claims that the Court of First Instance                An action against the Hellenic Republic was brought before the
    committed an error in law by declaring inadmissible the            Court of Justice of the European Communities on 3 December
    supplementary ground put forward by PARTEX in its reply            1999 by the Commission of the European Communities,
    in Case T-182/96, claiming breach of the rules on the              represented by Maria Kondou-Durande, of its Legal Service,
    sharing of competences between Member States and the               with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of
    Commission.                                                        Carlos Gómez de la Cruz, of its legal Service, Wagner Centre,
                                                                       Kirchberg.
— The appellant claims that the Court of First Instance
    committed an error in law contrary to the legislation              The Commission claims that the Court should:
    applicable to the ESF by finding that the rules on the
    sharing of competences between Member States and the               — declare that, by not adopting the laws, regulations and
    Commission had not been infringed.                                     administrative provisions necessary to transpose fully