CELEX: C1996/370/35
Language: en
Date: 1996-12-07 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 16 October 1996 by Max Kögler against the Court of Justice of the European Communities (Case T-160/96)

No C 370/ 16         1 EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                     7 . 12 . 96
Action brought on 23 September 1996 by Confederazione                  The applicants point out in this respect that when a public
Nazionale Coltivatori Diretti ( COLDIRETTI) and Others                 health emergency ( foot-and-mouth disease ) occurred in
against Commission of the European Communities and                     Italy, the farmers slaughtered all the animals and refrained
                 Council of the European Union                         from exporting infected meat, thus dealing with the root of
                        ( Case T-149/96 )                              the problem . That has not been done by the United
                                                                       Kingdom, on which the Community has not imposed any
                          ( 96/C 370/34 )
                                                                       sanction likely to eliminate the problem. Instead, it has
                                                                       merely formally embargoed exports of United Kingdom
                  (Language of the case: Italian)                      cattle, and has failed to do what it unarguably ought to
                                                                       have done : order the United Kingdom to resolve the
An action against the Commission of the European
                                                                       problem within its own borders also. According to the
Communities and Council of the European Union was
                                                                       applicants, it constitutes serious negligence to believe that
brought before the Court of First Instance of the European             the spread of the disease can be halted simply by restricting
Communities on 23 September 1996 by Confederazione
                                                                       exports .
Nazionale Coltivatori Diretti ( COLDIRETTI ), established
in Rome, and Others, represented by Roberto G. Aloisio, of
the Rome Bar and Fabrizio Massoni, of tihe Brussels Bar,               As regards the alleged invalidity of Regulation No 1357/96 ,
with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers              the applicants state that they seek its annulment only if it
of Jim Penning, 31 Grand Rue .                                         precludes the application for full compensation for the loss
                                                                       suffered. The regulation provides for the payment of
The applicants claim that the Court should:                            additional premiums to producers of cattle 'with a view to
                                                                       ensuring the future of the sector'. The applicants claim that
— order the defendants, in accordance with the second                  those provisions are invalid, in so far as they provide for the
     paragraph of Article 215 of the EC Treaty, jointly and            payment of additional premiums in respect of losses of
     severally to pay the sum due to each of the applicants            income to the producers and not in respect of the higher
     by way of compensation for damage to be assessed                  costs which they are forced to bear. In their view, payment
     during the proceedings, together with default interest at         of those additional premiums cannot deprive the injured
     the rate of 10% and taking inflation into account until           parties of their right to full compensation for all losses
     actual payment ( see Case C-308/87 Grifoni v. EAEC                suffered .
     [ 1994] ECR 1-341 ),
— annul Council Regulation ( EC ) No 1357/96 in so far as
     it limits the amount of compensation to be allocated to
     farmers and, in any event, quantifies that compensation
     by reference solely to lost income and not to increased           Action brought on 16 October 1996 by Max Kogler against
     costs ,                                                                 the Court of Justice of the European Communities
— order the defendants or the defendant held to be liable                                      ( Case T- 160/96 )
     to pay the costs of the proceedings .                                                       ( 96/C 370/35 )
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
                                                                                       (Language of the case: German)
The applicants, who are the Confederazione Nazionale
Coltivatori Diretti and numerous individual owner-occupier
                                                                        An action against the Court of Justice of the European
farmers, seek compensation for damage which they claim
                                                                        Communities was brought before the Court of First
has been caused by the way in which the Community                       Instance of the European Communities on 16 October 1996
institutions responded to the collapse of the beef and veal             by Max Kogler, of Konz ( Federal Republic of Germany ),
market as a result of the outbreak of BSE ( bovine
                                                                        represented by Theo Bakes, Rechtsanwalt, of Trier ( Federal
 spongiform encephalitis, known as 'mad cow disease ') in               Republic of Germany), with an address for service in
the United Kingdom.                                                     Luxembourg at the Chambers of Rene Weber, of Messrs
                                                                        Weber, Stein & Thiel, 3 Rue de la Loge .
 According to the applicants, the defendants did not make
 proper use of the powers and duties which they possess in
 order to avert crises and the danger of crises with harmful            The applicant claims that the Court should:
 consequences for the health of Community nationals . They
 allege that the Community institutions:
                                                                        — annul the decision of the Complaints Committee of the
 — have misused the powers available to them,                               Court of Justice of 1 July 1996 ,
 — have failed to make use in time of the repressive                    — recalculate and definitively determine the applicant's
      measures provided for by Community legislation which                  retirement pension for the period from 1 July 1991 to
      would have eradicated the epidemic,                                   30 June 1994 on the basis of the weightings for Berlin
                                                                            fixed annually by the Council,
 — have negligently underestimated the extent of the
      problem and, by failing to tackle it with the requisite
      decisiveness, have allowed infected beef and veal to              — alternatively, designate a date in the near future when
      circulate in Europe .                                                 that calculation and determination will take place .
 ---pagebreak--- 7 . 12 . 96            EN 1                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                  No C 370 / 17
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                    interpreted by case-law. He maintains that the Commission
                                                                       has not accorded the union which he represents all the
The applicant states, with regard to the admissibility of his          rights to which it is entitled, inasmuch as the practical effect
claim, that it is directed not against an act of the appointing        of the contested decision results is to prohibit it from taking
authority but against a failure to act . That failure to act           part in meetings organized between the institutions and
consists in the fact that, because the weightings have still           trade unions and staff associations, to refuse it the
not been definitively fixed, the applicant's pension for the           necessary means for properly carrying out its tasks, to deny
period from 1 July 1991 to 30 June 1994 has not yet been               it the right to disseminate information and to prohibit it
finally determined .                                                   from carrying on trade union activities during working
                                                                       hours on the Commission's premises .
Moreover, the action is also well founded since there
                                                                       The applicant also complains that the Commission has not
appears to be no reason why the principles applying to
                                                                       complied with the framework agreement and that it has
officials residing in the Federal Republic of Germany                  distorted the aims thereof.
should differ from those applying in respect of all other
countries, or why the appointing authority should refrain              Lastly, he pleads infringement of the obligation to provide a
from applying the principles clearly obtaining since June              statement of reasons arising from the second paragraph of
1994 to the preceding period as well .                                 Article 25 and Article 90 ( 1 ) of the Staff Regulations .
Action brought on 17 October 1996 by Gundolf Bosetti                   Action brought on 18 October 1996 by Sandro Forcheri
    against the Commission of the European Communities                    against the Commission of the European Communities
                         ( Case T-161 /96 )                                                    ( Case T-l 62/96 )
                           ( 96/C 370/36 )                                                       ( 96/C 370/37)
                 (Language of the case: French)                                         (Language of the case: French)
An action against the Commission of the European                       An action against the Commission of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First                      Communities was brought before the Court of First
Instance of the European Communities on 17 October 1996                Instance of the European Communities on 18 October 1996
by Gundolf Bosetti , residing in Luxembourg, represented by            by Sandro Forcheri , residing in Brussels, represented by
Gilles Bouneou, of the Luxembourg Bar, with an address                 Marc-Albert Lucas of the Liege Bar, with an address for
for service in Luxembourg at his Chambers, 15 Avenue du                service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Evelyne Korn ,
                                                                       21 Rue de Nassau .
Bois .
                                                                       The applicant claims that the Court should:
The applicant claims that the Court should :
                                                                       — annul or declare to be unlawful the failure of the
— annul the decision of the Commission of 31 October                        Commission to second the Head of Division B/4 of
     1995 refusing to admit the independent trade union                     DG XXI to SAMCOMM on the date that he took up
     'Action et Defense — Luxembourg' to the framework                      his duties or at the very least with effect from
     agreement of 20 September 1974 concerning relations                    29 October 1992,
     between the Commission and trade unions and staff
     associations ,                                                    — annul the Commission 's decision of 12 December 1995
                                                                            refusing the applicant's request for payment of the
— order the Commission to pay all the costs.                                differential allowance provided for by Article 7 ( 2 ) of
                                                                            the Staff Regulations,
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
                                                                       — annul the Commission's decision of 24 July 1996
                                                                            granting his complaint in part, in that it fails to accept
The applicant, deputy general secretary of the trade union                  that he has, since 29 October 1992 , been performing
'Action et Defense — Luxembourg', states that on                            temporarily the duties of Head of Division XXI B/4 and
9 October 1995 that organization applied to be admitted to                  in that it therefore does not grant him the differential
the framework agreement of 20 September 1974                                allowance from 30 January 1993 and without
concerning relations between the Commission and trade                       limitation in time,
unions and staff associations . On 31 October 1995 the
competent Member of the Commission rejected the                        — order the Commission to pay him that differential
application on the ground that, as matters then stood, he                   allowance, together with interest for late payment at the
was not able to assess the extent to which the organization                 rate of 8% per annum from the date each month on
in question was a representative body.                                      which that allowance should have been paid until full
                                                                            payment,
The applicant considers that that decision disregarded
Articles 9 and 24a of the Staff Regulations of officials, as           — order the Commission to pay the costs .