CELEX: C2000/176/44
Language: en
Date: 2000-06-24 00:00:00
Title: Case T-93/00: Action brought on 19 April 2000 by Alessandrini Srl and Others against the Commission of the European Communities

24.6.2000              EN                       Official Journal of the European Communities                                      C 176/25
The applicant claims that the Court should:                                service in Luxembourg at the chambers of Ernest Arendt, 8-10
                                                                           Rue Mathias Hardt.
— annul the decision of the Settlements Office of the Joint
     Sickness Insurance Scheme authorising reimbursement in
     respect of services provided to the applicant’s son, on the           The applicants claim that the Court should:
     ground that the authorisations in question were issued on
     a different basis from that argued by the applicant, with
     the support of all the relevant documents;                            — in accordance with Article 230 EC, annul the Commission
                                                                               decision notified by letter of 26 January 2000, No 02418,
— annul the consequent settlements on the further ground of                    received on 9 February 2000, signed by the Director-
     calculation errors;                                                       General for Agriculture, J.M. Silva Rodrı́guez;
— order the Commission to pay the costs.
                                                                           — and/or order the Commission to pay compensation under
                                                                               Article 235 and the second paragraph of Article 288 EC;
Pleas in law and main arguments
The applicant, a former Commission official, challenges the                — order the Commission to pay the costs in any event.
decision altering the legal basis for reimbursement of expenses
incurred by reason of the serious illness of a dependent son of
his. The applicant maintains that the son requires paramedical
                                                                           Pleas in law and main arguments
assistance, having to be hospitalised in order to overcome
mental crises.
                                                                           At the end of November 1998, the applicant companies were
Until the end of 1998, the Commission reimbursed those                     allocated their reference quantity for 1999, based on the
expenses under Paragraph 1 of Title X of Annex 1 to the Rules              average quantity of bananas imported from third countries
on Sickness Insurance, that is to say as paramedical assistance.           in the three-year period 1994/1995/1996. They therefore
As from 1999, however, reimbursement of the same expenses,                 submitted applications for the quarterly certificates to be used
incurred in the same factual and legal context, was authorised             during 1999, and obtained certificates for the importation of
on the basis of Paragraph 2(c) and (d) of Title X, that is to say          ACP bananas in the full amount requested. Subsequently
as nursing attendance at home.                                             finding themselves unable to use those certificates in the fourth
                                                                           quarter of 1999 they requested, in substitution, certificates
In support of his claims, the applicant argues:                            for importation from third countries and release from the
— that in the present case it was unlawful to apply Paragraph              guarantees provided. The present action is directed against the
     2(c) and (d) of Title X of Annex 1 to the Rules on Sickness           negative decision of the Commission on that point.
     Insurance (cost of nursing attendance at home);
— that the services in question are paramedical in nature,                 In support of their claims, the applicants argue:
     maintaining in that respect that determination of the care
     needed by individual patients is an exclusively medical               — Infringement by the Commission of Council Regulation
     decision;                                                                 (EEC) No 404/93 of 13 February 1993 on the common
                                                                               organization of the market in bananas (1), as amended by
— that in this case the professional qualification of a medical
                                                                               Regulation (EC) No 1637/98. By that latter regulation, the
     auxiliary is needed.
                                                                               Council intended to adapt the common organisation of
                                                                               the market to the rulings of the Panel and the Appellate
                                                                               Body of the World Trade Organisation, with the removal
                                                                               of the distinction between Category A operators and
                                                                               Category B operators, which was censured as contrary to
                                                                               GATT rules.
Action brought on 19 April 2000 by Alessandrini Srl
and Others against the Commission of the European
                           Communities                                     — Illegality of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2362/98 of
                                                                               28 October 1998 laying down detailed rules for the
                          (Case T-93/00)                                       implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 404/93
                                                                               regarding imports of bananas into the Community (2). By
                         (2000/C 176/44)                                       that regulation, the Commission introduced measures
                                                                               ‘crystallising’ the situation created by Regulation No
                                                                               404/93, in its original version, in favour of operators in
                    (Language of the case: Italian)                            Category B, by fixing as the reference period for the
                                                                               allocation of the annual individual quantity the years
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-                      1994-1995-1996. Thanks to the choice of that reference
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the                     period, Category B operators may import bananas from
European Communities on 19 April 2000 by Alessandrini Srl                      third countries with the certificates obtained as operators
and Others, represented by Wilma Viscardini Donà and                           of that category, whereas Category A operators are denied
Gabriele Donà, both of the Padua Bar, with an address for                      that possibility.
 ---pagebreak--- C 176/26              EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                       24.6.2000
— Infringement of the right of operators to use their reference         Pleas in law and main arguments
    quantity to the full, as an expression of the fundamental
    right of property and free enterprise.
                                                                        In Regulation No 465/2000 the Commission states that the
— Infringement of the principle of non-discrimination, in so            import of sugar and mixtures of sugar and cocoa originating
    far as the Commission created supply conditions for                 in the overseas countries and territories has been increasing
    operators importing ACP bananas that were more favour-              greatly since 1997, particularly those products with EC/OCT
    able than those for traditional operators importing bananas         cumulation of origin.
    from third countries.
                                                                        According to the Commission, in recent years difficulties have
(1) OJ L 47, 25.2.1993, p. 1.                                           arisen on the Community sugar market. There is a surplus
(2) OJ L 293, 31.10.1998, p. 32.
                                                                        on that market. The operation of the Community market
                                                                        organisation may be greatly destabilised by those difficulties.
                                                                        For that reason it is planned to reduce the production quotas
                                                                        in the Community. The greater the import, the lower the
                                                                        production quota. The Commission has therefore decided to
                                                                        permit the EC/OCT cumulation of origin for products for a
                                                                        maximum of 3 340 tonnes (Article 1 of Regulation No
                                                                        465/2000).
Action brought on 18 April 2000 by Rica Foods (Free
Zone) NV against the Commission of the European
                          Communities                                   The applicant states that it has had to restrict its activities
                                                                        considerably and has had to cease completely from futures
                                                                        contracts.
                         (Case T-94/00)
                        (2000/C 176/45)                                 In support of its action it submits inter alia the following pleas:
                                                                        — breach of Article 109 of the OCT Decision:
                   (Language of the case: Dutch)
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-                    — factual incorrectness of the considerations on which
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the                       the Commission based its decision;
European Communities on 18 April 2000 by Rica Foods (Free
Zone) NV, whose registered office is at Oranjestad (Aruba),
                                                                             — the difficulties to which the Commission refers are not
represented by G. van der Wal, of the Brussels Bar, with an
                                                                                 difficulties within the meaning of Article 109(1) of the
address for service at the Chambers of A. May, 398 Route
                                                                                 OCT Decision;
d’Esch.
The applicant claims that the Court should:                                  — the restrictions laid down in the Regulation have no or
                                                                                 insufficient influence on the difficulties referred to by
                                                                                 the Commission;
— annul Regulation (EC) No 465/2000 (1);
— hold that the Community is responsible for the damage                 — breach of the principle of proportionality;
    suffered by the applicant because of the fact that since
    1 March 2000 the import of the products referred to in
    Regulation No 465/2000 is prevented or restricted as a              — misuse of powers;
    consequence of Regulation No 465/2000, and hold that
    the parties are to reach agreement regarding the extent of
    the damage suffered by the applicant and that in the event          — inadequate statement of reasons.
    they do not agree thereon, order that the procedure shall
    recommence within a period to be laid down by the Court
    in order to determine the extent of the damage, and order
    the Community to pay the provisionally estimated and yet            (1) Commission Regularion (EC) No 465/2000 of 29 February 2000
    to be estimated damage, in the alternative order the                    introducing safeguard measures for imports from the overseas
    Community to pay compensation to be determined equit-                   countries and territories of sugar sector products with EC/OCT
    ably by the Court, together with interest of 8 % per annum              cumulation of origin (OJ L 56, 1.3.2000, p. 39).
    from the date of the application until the date of payment
    in full;
— order the Commission to pay the costs.