CELEX: C1997/318/43
Language: en
Date: 1997-10-18 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 15 July 1997 by Grundig AG against the Commission of the European Communities (Case T-210/97)

C 318/22                EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                   18 . 10 . 97
 Communities on 15 July 1997 by Georges Berthu, residing                  Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
 at Chelles ( France ), represented by Alexandre Varaut, of
 the Paris Bar, 9 rue Alfred de Vigny, Paris.
                                                                         The pleas in law and main arguments of the applicant,
                                                                         which imported colour television sets from Turkey
 The applicant claims that the Court should censure                      continuously during the period from 1 January 1991 to
 Council Regulation ( EC ) No 1103/97.                                    15 January 1994 and which is also contesting a
                                                                         Commission decision addressed to Germany stating that
                                                                         the remission of import duties is not justified in the case
 Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                     of the applicant, are the same as those in Cases T-187/
                                                                         97 H and T-l 92/97 (2).
 The applicant, a Member of the European Parliament,                     (') See page 18 of this Official Journal .
 directs his action against Council Regulation ( EC )                    ( 2 ) See page 19 of this Official Journal .
 No 1103/97 of 17 June 1997 on certain provisions
 relating to the introduction of the euro, which in
 particular replaces every reference to the ecu in legal
 instruments by a reference to the euro . It follows a
 previous action which the applicant directed against the
 Commission's decision, given on 16 October 1996 ,
 proposing to the Council the text of the above Regulation               Action brought on 15 July 1997 by Hertie Waren- und
 ( Case T-175/96 (*)). That first action was held by the                 Kaufhaus GmbH against the Commission of the European
 Court of First Instance to be manifestly inadmissible. The                                           Communities
 applicant had already stated in his first application that, if                                     Case T-2 11/97
 the Court of First Instance accepted the Commission's
 argument concerning inadmissibility, he would bring                                                 ( 97/C 318/44 )
 another action against the Regulation itself. Accordingly,
the pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those
relied on in Case T-175/96 .                                                              (Language of the case: German)
 (') OJ C 9, 11 . 1 . 1997, p. 19 .                                     An action against the Commission of the European
                                                                         Communities was brought before the Court of First
                                                                        Instance of the European Communities on 15 July 1997
                                                                        by Hertie Waren- und Kaufhaus GmbH, Frankfurt am
                                                                        Main, represented by Ehle & Schiller, Rechtsanwalte,
                                                                        Cologne, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the
                                                                        Chambers of Marc Lucius, 6 rue Michel Welter.
Action brought on 15 July 1997 by Grundig AG against
        the Commission of the European Communities
                                                                        The applicant claims that the Court should:
                           ( Case T-210/97)
                             ( 97/C 318/43 )
                                                                       — annul the decision of the Commission of 19 February
                                                                                1997 ( REM: 18/96 ) refusing the remission of customs
                 (Language of the case: German)                                duties amounting to DM 593 110,16,
                                                                       — order the defendant to pay the costs.
An action against the Commission of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First
Instance of the European Communities on 15 July 1997                   Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
by Grundig AG, Fiirth ( Federal Republic of Germany ),
represented by Ehle & Schiller, Rechtsanwalte, Cologne,
with an address for service in Luxembourg at the                       The pleas in law and main arguments of the applicant,
Chambers of Marc Lucius, 6 rue Michel Welter.                          which imported colour television sets from Turkey during
                                                                       the period from 1 September 1992 to 1 March 1994 and
                                                                       which is also contesting a Commission decision addressed
The applicant claims that the Court should:                            to Germany stating that the remission of import duties is
                                                                       not justified in the case of the applicant, are the same as
                                                                       those in Cases T-186/97 (') and T-191/97 ( 2).
— annul the decision of the Commission of 19 February
     1997 ( REM: 17/96 ) refusing the remission of a sum               (') See page 17 of this Official Journal .
     amounting to DM 6 596 210,31 ,                                    ( 2 ) See page 19 of this Official Journal .
— order the defendant to pay the costs.