CELEX: C2001/108/15
Language: en
Date: 2001-04-07 00:00:00
Title: Case C-76/01 P: Appeal brought on 14 February 2001 by Committee of the Cotton and Allied Textile Industries of the European Union (Eurocoton) and others against the judgment delivered on 29 November 2000 by the Second Chamber, Extended Composition, of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities in case T-213/97 between Committee of the Cotton and Allied Textile Industries of the European Union (Eurocoton) and others and Council of the European Union, supported by United Kingdom

C 108/10                EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                       7.4.2001
            —     annul the express rejection of the complaint           Pleas in law and main arguments
                  lodged by the appellant on 18 May 1998,
                  notified to him by registered letter of
                                                                         The Member States are required by the binding character of
                  10 December 1998;
                                                                         the third paragraph of Article 249 and Article 10 EC (ex third
                                                                         paragraph of Article 189 and Article 5 of the EC Treaty) to
      (c)   order, in any event, the defendant to pay all the            adopt the measures needed to transpose directives into national
            costs both at first instance and in the present appeal.      law before the expiry of the time-limit laid down for that
                                                                         purpose and to communicate those measures immediately to
                                                                         the Commission. That time-limit expired on 30 October
                                                                         1999 without the Hellenic Republic having notified to the
                                                                         Commission the provisions transposing the directive in ques-
Pleas and main arguments                                                 tion into national law.
                                                                         (1) OJ L 257, 10.10.1996, p. 26.
Infringement of Community law, in particular Article 33 of
the Statute of the Court of Justice, given that the obligation to
provide reasons implies, in particular, that the grounds relied
on are admissible in law, that is to say adequate, relevant, free
of errors of law and fact and consistent.
                                                                         Appeal brought on 14 February 2001 by Committee of
                                                                         the Cotton and Allied Textile Industries of the European
                                                                         Union (Eurocoton) and others against the judgment
                                                                         delivered on 29 November 2000 by the Second Chamber,
                                                                         Extended Composition, of the Court of First Instance of
                                                                         the European Communities in case T-213/97 (1) between
                                                                         Committee of the Cotton and Allied Textile Industries of
                                                                         the European Union (Eurocoton) and others and Council
                                                                           of the European Union, supported by United Kingdom
Action brought on 13 February 2001 by the Commission
of the European Communities against the Hellenic Repub-
                                  lic                                                            (Case C-76/01 P)
                                                                                                 (2001/C 108/15)
                           (Case C-64/01)
                                                                         An appeal against the judgment delivered on 29 November
                          (2001/C 108/14)                                2009 by the Second Chamber, Extended Composition, of the
                                                                         Court of First Instance of the European Communities in case
                                                                         T-213/97 between Committee of the Cotton and Allied Textile
                                                                         Industries of the European Union (Eurocoton) and others and
An action against the Hellenic Republic was brought before               Council of the European Union, supported by United Kingdom,
the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 13 Febru-            was brought before the Court of Justice of the European
ary 2001 by the Commission of the European Communities,                  Communities on 14 February 2001 by Committee of the
represented by Richard Wainwright, Principal Legal Adviser,              Cotton and Allied Textile Industries of the European Union
and Panagiotis Panagiotopoulos, a national civil servant on              (Eurocoton), established in Brussels, Belgium, Ettlin Gesell-
secondment to its Legal Service.                                         schaft für Spinnerei und Weberei AG, established in Ettlingen,
                                                                         Germany, Textil Hof Weberei GmbH & Co. KG, established in
                                                                         Hof, Germany, H. Hecking Söhne GmbH & Co., established in
The Commission claims that the Court should:                             Stadtlohn, Germany, Spinnweberei Uhingen GmbH, estab-
                                                                         lished in Uhingen, Germany, F.A. Kümpers GmbH & Co.,
                                                                         established in Rheine, Germany, Tenthorey SA, established in
1.    declare that, by failing to adopt and to notify to the             Eloyes, France, Les Tissages des Héritiers de G. Perrin —
      Commission, within the time-limit laid down, the laws,             Groupe Alain Thirion (HPG-GAT Tissages), established in
      regulations and administrative provisions necessary to             Comimont, France, Établissements des Fils de Victor Perrin
      comply fully with Council Directive 96/61/EC of 24 Sep-            SARL, established in Thiéfosse, France, Filatures et Tissages de
      tember 1996 (1) concerning integrated pollution preven-            Saulxures-sur-Moselotte, established in Saulxures-sur-Moselot-
      tion and control, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil       te, France, Tissage Mouline Thillot, established in Thillot,
      its obligations under the EC Treaty;                               France, Filature Niggeler & Küpfer SpA, established in Capriolo,
                                                                         Italy, Standardtela SpA, established in Milan, Italy, represented
                                                                         by Clive Stanbrook QC and Philip Bentley QC, with an address
2.    order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.                      for service in Luxembourg.
 ---pagebreak--- 7.4.2001               EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                      C 108/11
The Appellant claims that:                                               —     it infringed Articles 190 and 215 of the EC Treaty (now
                                                                               Articles 253 and 288 EC), and the general legal principle
                                                                               of coherence in that it held that the argument that the
—     the judgment of the Court of First Instance of 29 Novem-                 Measure Challenged was unlawful for failure to state
      ber 2000 in case T-213/97 be annulled in so far as it                    reasons cannot be upheld and, additionally, it implied that
      applies to the Appellants;                                               the Council had complete freedom of action unfettered by
                                                                               the Basic Regulation.
—     the Council’s Decision not to adopt the proposal for a             (1) OJ C 318, 18.10.1997, p. 23.
      regulation imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on
      imports of unbleached (grey) cotton fabrics in the People’s
      Republic of China, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Pakistan and
      Turkey (COM (97) 160 final, of 21 April 1997) be
      annulled in so far as it applies to the Appellants;
                                                                         Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Corte d’appello
—     the Appellants’ claim for compensation for the damage              di Milano by order of 29 January 2001 in the appeal
      in case T-213/97 be declared founded and the determi-              brought by Payroll Data Services (Italy) srl, ADP Europe
      nation of the amount of compensation referred back to                                    SA and ADP GSI SA
      the Court of First Instance;
                                                                                                   (Case C-79/01)
—     the Council be ordered to pay the Appellants’ costs both
      in the present appeal and also in case T-213/97.                                            (2001/C 108/16)
                                                                         Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
                                                                         European Communities by order of 29 January 2001 by the
                                                                         Corte d’appello di Milano (Court of Appeal, Milan), which was
                                                                         received at the Court Registry on 15 February 2001, for a
Pleas in law and main arguments                                          preliminary ruling in the appeal brought by Payroll Data
                                                                         Services (Italy) srl, ADP Europe SA and ADP GSI SA on the
                                                                         following question:
The Appellants submit that the Court of First Instance infringed         Do Articles 43 EC and 49 EC preclude Italian courts from
Community law in the following ways:                                     applying Article 1 of Law No 12 of 11 January 1979, as
                                                                         amended by Article 58(16) of Law No 144 of 17 May 1999,
                                                                         regulating the profession of employment consultant, to the
—     it infringed Article 173 of the EC Treaty (now Article 230         extent to which it prohibits, in absolute terms, external
      EC) as interpreted by the case law (and additionally, as           undertakings providing services relating to the preparation
      read in the light of Article 9.1, 6.9, 12.2 and 13 and of          and printing of pay slips from providing their services to
      the GATT 1994 Anti-dumping Agreement) and the                      undertakings having less than 250 employees?
      general legal principle of coherence, in that it held the
      Measure Challenged was not a reviewable act within the
      meaning of the said Article 173 of the EC Treaty (now
      Article 230 EC);
—     it infringed Article 19 of the EC Statute of the Court of          Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunal d’In-
      Justice and Article 44 of the Rules of Procedure of the            stance de Châteauroux by Judgment of 26 January 2001
      Court of First Instance in that it held that the Appellants            in the case of SARL Michel v Recettes des Douanes
      had submitted a new claim in breach of those dispositions;
                                                                                                   (Case C-80/01)
—     it infringed Article 173 of the EC Treaty (now Article 230
      EC) as interpreted by the case law (and additionally as                                     (2001/C 108/17)
      read in the light of Articles 9.1, 6.9, 12.2 and 13 of the
      GATT 1994 Anti-dumping Agreement) in that it held                  Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
      that the mere expiry of the 15-month period provided               European Communities by judgment of 26 January 2001
      for in Article 6(9) of the Basic Regulation does not               by the Tribunal d’Instance de Châteauroux (District Court,
      constitute a decision by the Council which could be the            Châteauroux), which was received at the Court Registry on
      subject of an action for annulment on the basis of Article         16 February 2001, for a preliminary ruling in the case of SARL
      173 of the EC Treaty (now Article 230 EC); and                     Michel v Recettes des Douanes on the following question: