CELEX: C2003/171/14
Language: en
Date: 2003-07-19 00:00:00
Title: Case C-175/03: Action brought on 14 April 2003 by the Hellenic Republic against the Commission of the European Communities

19.7.2003               EN                           Official Journal of the European Union                                            C 171/9
                    ORDER OF THE COURT                                       2003 by the Commission of the European Communities,
                                                                             represented by B. Stromsky and R. Amorosi, acting as Agents.
                        (Fourth Chamber)
                                                                             The applicant claims that the Court should:
                         of 26 March 2003
                                                                             1.    declare that, by failing to adopt and bring into force
in Case C-170/01 P: Compañía Internacional de Pesca y                              within the prescribed period the laws, regulations and
Derivados SA (INPESCA) v Commission of the European                                administrative provisions necessary to comply with
                          Communities (1)                                          Directive 2000/70/EC of the European Parliament and of
                                                                                   the Council of 16 November 2000 amending Council
(Appeal — Action for annulment — Action for damages —                              Directive 93/42/EEC as regards medical devices incorpor-
Confirmatory measure — Absence of substantive new facts                            ating stable derivates of human blood or human plas-
       — Inadmissible — Appeal manifestly unfounded)                               ma ( 1) and, in any event, by failing to communicate them
                                                                                   to the Commission, the French Republic has failed to
                                                                                   fulfil its obligations under that directive;
                          (2003/C 171/12)
                                                                             2.    order the French Republic to pay the costs.
                   (Language of the case: Spanish)
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                   in the European Court Reports)                            Pleas in law and main arguments
In Case C-170/01 P: Compañía Internacional de Pesca y                        Article 2 of Directive 2000/70/EC provides that Member
Derivados SA (INPESCA), established in Bermeo (Spain),                       States are to adopt and publish the laws, regulations and
(lawyers: M.I. Angulo Fuertes and M.B. Angulo Fuerte) —                      administrative provisions necessary to comply with that
appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance of                directive before 13 December 2001 and that they are immedi-
the European Communities (Second Chamber) in Case T-186/                     ately to inform the Commission thereof. The Commission has
98 Inpesca v Commssion [2001] ECR II-557, seeking to have                    no information to enable it to conclude that the French
that judgment set aside, the other party to proceedings being:               authorities have definitively adopted the necessary measures
Commission of the European Communities (agents: S. Pardo                     to implement the directive or, in any event, communicated
Quintillán and J. Guerra Fernández) — the Court (Fourth                      such measures to it and thus finds that the French Republic
Chamber), composed of C.W.A. Timmermans, President of the                    has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive. The
Chamber, A. La Pergola (rapporteur) and S. Von Bahr, Judges;                 Commission further submits that the French Republic cannot
L.A. Geelhoed, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar; has made               rely on the amendment made to Directive 2000/70/EC in
an order on 26 February 2003 by which it:                                    order to justify its failure to transpose it within the prescribed
                                                                             period since the amendment did not affect the deadline for
                                                                             transposition.
1.    Dismisses the appeal;
2.    Orders Compañía Internacional de Pesca y Derivados SA                  (1 ) OJ 2000 L 313, p. 22.
      (INPESCA) to pay the costs.
( 1) OJ C 200, 14.7.2001.
                                                                             Action brought on 14 April 2003 by the Hellenic Republic
                                                                                against the Commission of the European Communities
Action brought on 3 April 2003 by the Commission of
  the European Communities against the French Republic
                                                                                                       (Case C-175/03)
                          (Case C-155/03)
                                                                                                       (2003/C 171/14)
                          (2003/C 171/13)
                                                                             An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
An action against the French Republic was brought before the                 ties was brought before the Court of Justice of the European
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 3 April                      Communities on 14 April 2003 by the Hellenic Republic,
 ---pagebreak--- C 171/10               EN                         Official Journal of the European Union                                         19.7.2003
represented by Vasilios Kontolaimos, State Legal Adviser, and             (d)   The Commission exceeded the limits of its discretion and
Stiliani Kharitaki, Member of the State Legal Service, with an                  infringed the principle of proportionality since it imposed
address for service in Luxembourg at the Greek Embassy, 27                      such a high correction rate on all the islands of the
rue Marie-Adélaïde.                                                             Aegean, ignoring the limited risk of loss for the Fund, the
                                                                                fact that the check was being carried out for the first time,
                                                                                the fact that the Greek authorities complied immediately
                                                                                with the recommendations of its staff, and the magnitude
The applicant claims that the Court should:                                     of the consequences — financial and environmental —
                                                                                which are inversely proportional to the population of
                                                                                each island and may be catastrophic for the smaller
annul, or otherwise amend, Commission Decision C(2003)                          islands (given that preservation of their olive groves and
500 excluding from Community financing certain expenditure                      their survival are dependent upon the grant of aid).
incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of
the EAGGF, in respect of the chapter thereof which concerns
financial corrections to the detriment of the Hellenic Republic.
Otherwise, and entirely in the alternative, the correction
imposed must be restricted: (a) solely to the area of the island
of Lesvos or in the alternative of the island of Rhodes; (b) to
expenditure incurred up until 16 February 2001 at the latest;
and (c) to a maximum rate of 2 %.
                                                                          Appeal brought on 25 April 2003 by Zisis Drouvis against
                                                                          the judgment delivered on 26 February 2003 by the
                                                                          Fourth Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the
                                                                          European Communities in Case T-184/00 between Zisis
                                                                           Drouvis and the Commission, supported by the Council
Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                                                  (Case C-187/03 P)
The contested decision adopted by the Commission should be
annulled for the following reasons.                                                                (2003/C 171/15)
(a)   It misinterpreted and misapplied Article 11 of Regulation
      No 2019/93, Articles 1, 2, 3 and 4 of Regulation
      No 2837/93, Article 5(2)(c) of Regulation No 729/70 as              An appeal against the judgment delivered on 26 February
      amended by Regulation No 1287/98, and Article 7(4) of               2003 by the Fourth Chamber of the Court of First Instance of
      Regulation No 1258/99.                                              the European Communities in Case T-184/00 between Zisis
                                                                          Drouvis and the Commission, supported by the Council as
                                                                          intervener, was brought before the Court of Justice of the
(b)   In the alternative — assuming that the Commission’s                 European Communities on 25 April 2003 by Zisis Drouvis,
      interpretation of the provisions of Regulations No 2019/            represented by Ioannis Stamouolis, of the Athens Bar.
      93 and No 2837/93 is correct — given the manifest lack
      of clarity of the regulations and in accordance with
      the guidelines, any misapplication of the Community                 The appellant claims that the Court should:
      provisions connected with that interpretation that may
      have occurred should not be regarded as proving the                 —     find the appeal lawful and well founded;
      existence of all the imputed deficiencies of the system or
      be taken into account when forming the final decision
                                                                          —     set aside the judgment under appeal delivered by the
      regarding the need for imposition of a general correction
                                                                                Court of First Instance on 26 February 2003 in Case
      and indeed of such a high rate.
                                                                                T-184/00;
(c)   The Commission misappraised the facts established in                —     order the defendant to pay the costs.
      the course of the check and found without sufficient
      reasoning that there were fundamental deficiencies of
      a general nature entailing a particularly high risk of
      Community resources being lost, having first extrapolated           Grounds of appeal
      the findings (which related to the two islands which were
      checked) in an impermissible manner so as to cover all
      the islands of the Aegean. It thereby ignored the special           First ground:                 Erroneous interpretation and
      features which each island displays and vary in accordance                                        application of Article 6(2) ΕU,
      with location, size, population, land morphology, poten-                                          Article 14 of the European Con-
      tial for production, infrastructure and so forth — special                                        vention on Human Rights and
      features which are acknowledged by the very regulations                                           Article 1 of the First Protocol to
      that are applicable in respect of the islands of the Aegean.                                      that Convention.