CELEX: C1997/318/35
Language: en
Date: 1997-10-18 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 24 June 1997 by Crown Europe GmbH against the Commission of the European Communities (Case T-187/97)

C 318/18             I EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                 18 . 10 . 97
Action brought on 24 June 1997 by Crown Europe                         Action brought on 24 June 1997 by Profex Electronic
GmbH against            the    Commission   of the European            Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH against the Commission of
                             Communities                                                the European Communities
                           (Case T-l 87/97)                                                   ( Case T-190/97)
                            ( 97/C 318/35 )                                                     ( 97/C 318/36 )
                (Language of the case: German)                                        (Language of the case: German)
An action against the Commission of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First                      An action against the Commission of the European
Instance of the European Communities on 24 June 1997                   Communities was brought before the Court of First
by Crown Europe GmbH, whose registered office is at                    Instance of the European Communities on 24 June 1997
Gelsenkirchen,          represented      by   Dietrich      Ehle,      by Profex Electronic Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH, whose
Rechtsanwalt, Cologne, with an address for service in                  registered office is at Tiefenbach, represented by Gregor
Luxembourg at the Chambers of Marc Lucius, 6 rue                       Sobotta, Rechtsanwalt, Muhlheim an der Ruhr.
Michel Welter, Luxembourg.
                                                                       The applicant claims that the Court should:
The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                       — annul       Commission       Decision  REM     20/96      of
—i annul       Commission         Decision  REM       19/96    of
                                                                            19 February 1997, holding the remission of import
     19 February 1997, refusing the remission of a payment                 duties in a certain case on the application of Germany
     of DM 238 352,97,                                                     to be unjustified,
— order the Commission to pay the costs .
                                                                       — order the Commission to take a decision allowing the
                                                                           application for remission of the duties,
Pleas, in law and main arguments adduced in support:
                                                                       — order the Commission to pay the costs,
For the factual background and the legal arguments of the
applicant, which imported television sets from Turkey
between January 1991 and January 1994, and which                       — declare the judgment provisionally enforceable, if
challenges a Commission Decision of 19 February 1997                       necessary on provision of security.
addressed to Germany to the effect that the remission of
import duties in the applicant's case would be unjustified,
reference is made to the explanatory statements in Case                Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
T-l 86/97 0 ).
In addition to the legal arguments in that case, the                   For the factual background and the legal arguments of
applicant alleges an infringement in this case of the                  the applicant, which imported colour television sets
Commission's decision-making procedure, in that, first,                from Turkey between February and September 1992, and
the Commission did not have the applicant's full                       challenges a Commission Decision addressed to Germany
                                                                       to the effect that the remission of import duties in its case
application before it at the time it made its decision, and,
secondly, it is not clear whether the Commission also took             would be unjustified, reference is made to the explanatory
                                                                       statements in Cases T-186/97 and T-187/97 (');
its decision on the basis of Article 5 ( 2 ) of Regulation
( EEC ) No 1697/79 .
                                                                       In addition to the legal arguments in those cases, the
The applicant further argues that the Commission                       applicant maintains that it is not apparent on what
nevertheless supported its Decision both on the basis of               legal basis the Commission's officials carried out their
that provision and on the basis of Article 13 of Regulation            investigations in Turkey. If any facts were obtained at all
( EEC) No 1430/79 . With regard to Article 5 (2 ) of                   by means of those investigations, they were obtained in an
Regulation ( EEC ) No 1697/79, the Commission wrongly                  unlawful manner and, in accordance with the general
determined that the Turkish exporter of the colour                     principle of the rule of law, should not therefore have
television sets had misled or even deceived the Turkish                been used.
customs authorities, and that a provision for the payment
of proportionate duty was discernibly applicable to the
parties concerned.                                                     The applicant submits, moreover, that the television sets
                                                                       were probably produced in the context of inward
                                                                       processing, where the most usual procedure would be
(*) See previous case .
                                                                       for the local customs authorities not to levy any
                                                                       compensatory charges at all . Even if the television sets
                                                                       were not produced in that context, the charges should