CELEX: C1999/246/87
Language: en
Date: 1999-08-28 00:00:00
Title: Case T-156/99: Action brought on 28 June 1999 by Nordisk Færgefart A/S against the Council of the European Union

C 246/44                 EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                      28.8.1999
Action brought on 22 June 1999 by Luciano Simonella                       Action brought on 28 June 1999 by Nordisk Færgefart
  against the Commission of the European Communities                             A/S against the Council of the European Union
                          (Case T-153/99)                                                            (Case T-156/99)
                          (1999/C 246/86)
                                                                                                    (1999/C 246/87)
                    (Language of the case: French)
                                                                                              (Language of the case: German)
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 22 June 1999 by Luciano Simonel-                  An action against the Council of the European Union was
la, residing at Howald, Luxembourg, represented by Rosario                brought before the Court of First Instance of the European
Grasso, of the Luxembourg Bar, with an address for service in             Communities on 28 June 1999 by Nordisk Færgefart A/S,
Luxembourg at the latter’s Chambers, 35 Rue Notre-Dame.                   Faaborg (Denmark), represented by Ulrich Schrömbges, Klaus
                                                                          Landry and Lothar Harings, of Graf von Westphalen, Fritze &
The applicant claims that the Court should:                               Modest, Hamburg, with an address for service in Luxembourg
                                                                          at the Chambers of Arendt & Medernach, 8-10 Rue Mathias
— annul the decision impliedly rejecting the applicant’s                  Hardt.
     complaint registered on 25 November 1998 under No
     682/98;                                                              The applicant claims that the Court should:
— order the Commission to pay the applicant the sum of BF                 1. Set aside Council Directive 92/12/EEC of 25 February
     2 000 000 by way of compensation for material and                        1992 on the general arrangements for products subject to
     non-material damage suffered;                                            excise duty and on the holding, movement and monitoring
— order the Commission to pay all expenses and costs                          of such products (OJ 1992 L 76, p. 1), as amended by
     claimed by the applicant in the addendum of 11 September                 Council Directive 92/108/EEC (OJ 1992 L 390, p. 124),
     1998 which is deemed to supplement his complaint No                      Council Directive 94/74/EC (OJ 1994 L 365, p. 46), and
     586/98 of 6 August 1998, being an integral part of                       Council Directive 96/99/EC (OJ 1997 L 8, p. 12),
     the present complaint, those expenses and costs being
     quantified at LIT 150 000 000;                                           (a) in so far as it limits the arrangement in Article 28 [of
                                                                                    the directive] to 30 June 1999,
— order the Commission to pay all expenses and costs
     incurred in these proceedings.                                                 or, in the alternative,
Pleas in law and main arguments                                               (b) in so far as it results in trace barriers, contrary to the
                                                                                    Treaty, in intra-Community sea-crossings as defined in
                                                                                    Article 28;
The applicant contests the refusal of the appointing authority
to promote him to grade B 1 for the year 1996, or 1997 at
the latest.                                                               2. Order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.
In support of his claims he primarily argues that the Com-
mission has infringed:                                                    Pleas in law and main arguments
— Article 26 of the Staff Regulations in so far as his personnel          The applicant operates two ferry routes between Germany and
     file was not complete at the time when the appointing                Denmark which carry passengers and vehicles and offer on
     authority had to assess his merits. Moreover, the proposal           board tax-free goods for sale. A subsidiary also operates a
     that he be promoted had not been placed in the file.                 supermarket, in which ferry passengers can purchase domestic
                                                                          German products and in which bookings are made for holiday
— Article 43 of the Staff Regulations, in that he had not                 homes and short holiday breaks. The applicant announced
     received the 1990-93, 1993-95 or 1995-97 staff reports
                                                                          that both routes would cease to operate on 1 July 1999 and
     in good time, and had thus been denied an opportunity to
                                                                          that all employees would be dismissed, on the ground that a
     submit observations which he might have considered                   positive economic result could be achieved only through
     useful for the purposes of being promoted. He also stases            inclusion of the special arrangement (sale of tax-free goods on
     that since 15 June 1998 (the applicant reserves the right            board) in force until 30 June 1999.
     to specify the exact date) the 1995-97 staff report appears
     still to be pending for no valid reason.
                                                                          So far as the admissibility of its action is concerned, the
— Article 45 of the Staff Regulations, in that the comparative            applicant submits that, after lengthy discussions between the
     examination of the merits of the candidates for promotion            Member States, it was not until the ‘Cologne Summit’ on 3
     (provided for thereunder) was not carried out in the present         and 4 June 1999 that it became clear that the ‘tax-free
     case. The applicant maintains that it was decided at the             arrangement’ would not be extended. It was only then that
     inter-departmental meeting of 27 October 1994 that he                the directive became challengeable by the applicant, which,
     should be promoted during the 1996 promotions exercise,              moreover, considers itself to be directly and individually
     or, at the latest, during 1997.                                      concerned thereby. For that reason, the period for bringing an
                                                                          action ought to have begun to run on 5 June 1999 at the
                                                                          earliest.
 ---pagebreak--- 28.8.1999             EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                   C 246/45
In the applicant’s view, Directive 92/12/EEC is contrary to:                   Removal from the register of Case T-538/93 (1)
— the Community principle of the rule of law, inasmuch as
    it contains contradictory and unclear rules;                                               (1999/C 246/90)
— the Treaty objectives in the establishment of the internal
    market under Article 14 EC (ex Article 7a);                                           (Language of the case: English)
— the prohibition under Article 25 EC (ex Article 12) of
    customs duties and charges having equivalent effect;                By order of 30 March 1999 the President of the Fourth
                                                                        Chamber, Extended Composition of the Court of First Instance
— the prohibitions under Article 28 EC (ex Article 30) and              of the European Communities has ordered the removal from
    Article 29 EC (ex Article 34);                                      the register of Case T-538/93: Joh Harris v Council of the
                                                                        European Union and Commission of the European Communi-
— Article 93 EC (ex Article 99), authorising harmonisation              ties.
    of indirect taxation;
— the principle of proportionality, inasmuch as it is not
                                                                        (1) OJ C 319 of 26.11.1993.
    suited to the internal market;
— the principle of protection of legitimate expectations;
— a series of fundamental rights and freedoms, such as
    freedom to exercise a profession, right of ownership, and
    commercial and economic freedom.
                                                                               Removal from the register of Case T-548/93 (1)
                                                                                               (1999/C 246/91)
       Removal from the register of Case T-278/93 (1)
                        (1999/C 246/88)                                                   (Language of the case: English)
                  (Language of the case: English)                       By order of 1 March 1999 the President of the First Chamber,
                                                                        Extended Composition of the Court of First Instance of the
By order of 10 March 1999 the President of the Fourth                   European Communities has ordered the removal from the
Chamber, Extended Composition of the Court of First Instance            register of Case T-548/93: Ladbroke Racing Ltd v Council of
of the European Communities has ordered the removal from                the European Communities.
the register of Case T-278/93: David Alwyn Jones and
Mary Bridget Jones v Council of the European Union and
Commission of the European Communities.                                 (1) OJ C 319 of 26.11.1993.
(1) OJ C 165 of 2.7.1992.
Partial removal from the register of Joined Cases                              Removal from the register of Case T-72/95 (1)
            T-294/934, T-392/93 and T-413/93 (1)
                                                                                               (1999/C 246/92)
                        (1999/C 246/89)
                  (Language of the case: English)                                         (Language of the case: English)
By order of 30 March 1999 the President of the Fourth
Chamber, Extended Composition of the Court of First Instance            By order of 17 May 1999 the President of the Fifth Chamber
of the European Communities has ordered the removal from                of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities
the register of Cases T-294/93: Sean Coughlan v Council                 has ordered the removal from the register of Case T-72/95:
of the European Union and Commission of the European                    Comafrica SpA and Dole Fresh Fruit Europe Ltd & Co. v
Communities and T-413/93: Patrick Heffernan v Council of                Commission of the European Communities.
the European Communities.
                                                                        (1) OJ C 268 of 14.10.1995.
(1) OJ C 158 of 10.6.1993 and C 197 of 21.7.1993.