CELEX: C1996/269/06
Language: en
Date: 1996-09-14 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 19 June 1996 by the United Kingdom against the Commission of the European Communities (Case C-209/96)

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 .