CELEX: C1997/108/41
Language: en
Date: 1997-04-05 00:00:00
Title: JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE of 25 February 1997 in Joined Cases T-149/94 and T-181/94: Kernkraftwerke Lippe-Ems GmbH v. Commission of the European Communities (Euratom Treaty - Action for annulment and action for damages - Conclusion of a contract for the supply of uranium - Simplified procedure - Powers of the Agency - Time-limit for conclusion of the contract - Legal obstacle to conclusion - Diversification policy - Origin of the uranium - Market-related prices)

No C 108/20          EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                     5 . 4 . 97
    under the third paragraph of Article 189 of the EC                 on 3 March 1997 by the Commission of the European
    Treaty and Article 23 ( 1 ) of Directive 92/43/EEC,                Communities, represented by Hendrik van Lier and Laura
                                                                       Pignataro, acting as Agents, with an address for service in
— declare, in the alternative, that, by failing forthwith to           Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gomez de la Cruz,
    inform    the  Commission         of such    measures,   the       Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.
    Portuguese Republic failed to fulfil its obligations
     under those provisions,
— order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs .                     The applicant claims that the Court should:
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
                                                                       — declare that, by failing to adopt and, in any event, by
The mandatory nature of the provisions of the third                           failing to communicate within the prescribed period
paragraph of Article 189 and the first paragraph of                           the laws, regulations or administrative provisions
Article 5 of the EC Treaty requires Member States to                          necessary to comply with Council Directive 92/106/
adopt the measures necessary to transpose directives                          EEC of 7 December 1992 on the establishment of
addressed to them into their domestic law before the
                                                                              common rules for certain types of combined transport
expiry of the period prescribed for doing so . That period                    of goods between Member States ( 1 ), the Kingdom of
expired on 5 June 1994 without Portugal having brought                        Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under the
into force the necessary provisions .                                         EC Treaty and that Directive,
O OJ No L 206 , 22 . 7. 1992 , p . 7.
                                                                       — order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.
                                                                       Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
Action brought on 3 March 1997 by the Commission of
the European Communities against the Kingdom of
                               Belgium                                 The pleas in law and main arguments are analogous with
                        ( Case C-92/97)                                those in Case C-88/97 (2 ); the time-limit for transposition
                          ( 97/C 108/40 )                              expired on 1 July 1993 .
An action against the Kingdom of Belgium was brought                   (') OJ No L 368 , 17. 12 . 1992, p. 38 .
before the Court of Justice of the European Communities                 ( 2 ) See page 19 of this Official Journal .
                                                      COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
   JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE                              fred Ungemach and Helmut Nicolaus, Rechtsanwalte,
                     of 25 February 1997                                Diisseldorf, with an address for service in Luxembourg at
                                                                        the Chambers of Alex Bonn, 62 Avenue Guillaume,
 in Joined Cases T-149/94 and T-181/94: Kernkraftwerke                   against Commission of the European Communities ( Agent:
 Lippe-Ems GmbH v. Commission of the European                           Jiirgen Grunwald ) — application for the annulment of
                        Communities f )                                  Commission Decision 94/95/Euratom of 4 February 1994
                                                                         relating to a procedure in application of the second
  (Euratom Treaty — Action for annulment and action for                  paragraph of Article 53 of the Euratom Treaty ( OJ No
 damages — Conclusion of a contract for the supply of                    L 48 , 19 . 2 . 1994, p. 45 ), and of Commission Decision
  uranium — Simplified procedure — Powers of the Agency                   94/285/Euratom of 21 February 1994 relating to a
 — Time-limit for conclusion of the contract — Legal                     proceeding in application of the second paragraph of
  obstacle to conclusion — Diversification policy — Origin               Article 53 of the Euratom Treaty ( OJ No L 122, 17. 5 .
           of the uranium — Market-related prices)                        1994, p. 30 ), and for damages — the Court of First
                            ( 97/C 108/41 )                               Instance ( First Chamber, Extended Composition),
                                                                          composed of: A. Saggio, President, C. W. Bellamy, A.
                                                                          Kalogeropoulos, V. Tiili and M. R. M. Moura Ramos,
                (Language of the case: German)                            Judges; J. Palacio Gonzalez, Administrator, for the
                                                                          Registrar, has given a judgment on 25 February 1997, in
                                                                          which it:
  In Joined Cases T-149/94 and T-181/94: Kernkraftwerke
  Lippe-Ems GmbH, established in Lingen, Ems ( Germany ),
  represented by Bernd Kunth, Gerhard Wiedemann, Man­                      1 . dismisses the applications;
 ---pagebreak---  5 . 4 . 97          I EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                  No C 108/21
2 . orders the applicant to pay the costs.                             Action brought on 27 January 1997 by Viglienzone
                                                                       Adriatica SpA against Commission of the European
                                                                                                 Communities
 (') OJ No C 146, 28 . 5 . 1994, p. 13 ,
     OJ No C 174 , 25 . 6 . 1994, p . 22 .                                                    ( Case T-17/97 )
                                                                                                ( 97/C 108/43
                                                                                      (Language of the case: Italian)
                                                                       An action against the Commission of the European
Action brought on 16 January 1997 by Miguel Vicente­                   Communities was brought before the Court of First
Nunez against the Commission of the European                           Instance on 27 January 1997 by Viglienzone Adriatica
                             Communities
                                                                       SpA, represented by Bruno Elia and Ivano Vigliotti, of the
                            ( Case T-7/97)                             Genoa Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at
                                                                       the chambers of Alex Schmitt, 62 Avenue Guillaume .
                            ( 97/C 108/42 )
                                                                       The applicant claims that the Court of First Instance
                (Language of the case: French)                         should :
                                                                       — annul, pursuant to the fourth paragraph of Article 173
An action against the Commission of the European                           of the EC Treaty, the finding by which the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First                          Commission, on 11 November 1996 , rejected
Instance of the European Communities on 16 January
                                                                           Viglienzone Adriatica SpA's application for
1997 by Miguel Vicente-Nunez, residing at Krainem                          prequalification for call for tenders No 96/C 177/08
( Belgium ), represented by Marc-Albert Lucas, of the Liege                concerning the control of food aid,
Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the
Chambers of Evelyne Korn, 21 Rue de Nassau.
                                                                       — if necessary, annul or in any event declare
                                                                           inapplicable, under Article 184 of the EC Treaty,
The applicant claims that the Court should:                                point 10, paragraph ( c ) (4 ) (in so far as it relates to
                                                                           the list of subsidiaries in the Member States of the
                                                                           European Union ) and the first sentence of the third
— annul the decision of the Commission of 22 March                         paragraph of point 12 ( in so far as it excludes the
      1996 , addressed to the applicant on 27 March and                    possibility of challenging decisions of the scrutiny
      received on 28 March, inasmuch as it rejected his                    committee ) of notice of tender No 96/C 177/08
      request of November 1995 to be reclassified in                       concerning 'European Union food aid/food security'
      another grade on the basis of Article 31 ( 2 ) of the                and 'prequalification of firms for participation in the
      Staff Regulations,                                                   forthcoming restricted invitation to tender for the
                                                                           provision of services relating to the coordination of
                                                                           consignments and quality and quantity control of
— annul in so far as necessary the decision of the                         foodstuffs, supplies as food aid',
      Commission of 16 October rejecting the complaint
      lodged by the applicant on 27 June 1996 against that
      decision,                                                        — adopt any other measure considered necessary,
                                                                       — order the Commission to pay the costs .
— order the Commission to pay the costs .
                                                                       Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
                                                                       The applicant is an company whose application for
                                                                       prequalification for the purposes of notice of tender No 96/
The applicant, an official in Grade A 6, Step 2, relies on             C 177/08 concerning 'European Union food aid/food
the same plea in law as in the action which he brought                 security' and 'prequalification of firms for participation in
against the Commission of the European Communities on                  the forthcoming restricted invitation to tender for the
27 June 1996 (T-100/96 ), alleging that Article 32 of the              provision of services relating to the coordination of
Staff Regulations and the sixth and eighth paragraphs of               consignments and quality and quantity control of
Article 2 of the Commission's decision of 1 September                  foodstuffs, supplies as food aid' ( J ) was rejected.
1983 have been infringed and that the principle of equal
treatment has been breached. According to the applicant,
the Commission has, moreover, disregarded the level and                In support of its claims, the applicant alleges, first,
extent of his experience prior to his joining the                      infringement of Article 190 of the Treaty. It states that the
Commission .                                                           duty to state reasons is particularly important in the case
                                                                       of measures which affect the legal position of the
                                                                       addressees, and that the contested measure has a
                                                                       considerable legal impact on Viglienzone, in so far as it