CELEX: C2000/020/48
Language: en
Date: 2000-01-22 00:00:00
Title: Case T-242/99: Action brought on 19 October 1999 by Esso Nederland B.V. against the Commission of the European Communities

22.1.2000              EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                       C 20/23
(c) failed to properly evaluate the facts and law which establish        Action brought on 15 October 1999 by BP Nederland
    that the notified agreements do not satisfy the conditions           V.O.F., BP Direct V.O.F. and Actomat B.V. against the
    of Article 4(2) of Regulation No 17.                                          Commission of the European Communities
(1) OJ C 8, p. 4.                                                                                (Case T-237/99)
(2) OJ L 186, p. 28.
                                                                                                  (2000/C 20/47)
                                                                                            (Language of the case: Dutch)
                                                                         An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
Action brought on 18 October 1999 by Patrick Monod-                      ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
Gayraud against the Commission of the European Com-                      European Communities on 15 October 1999 by BP Nederland
                            munities                                     V.O.F., BP Direct V.O.F. and Actomat B.V., respectively estab-
                                                                         lished in Rotterdam, Alphen a/d Rijn and Amsterdam (Nether-
                                                                         lands), represented by Mr van Empel and Mr Smeets, of the
                        (Case T-234/99)
                                                                         Amsterdam Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at
                                                                         the Chambers of G. Harles, 8-10 Rue Mathias Hardt.
                         (2000/C 20/46)
                                                                         The applicants claim that the Court should:
                   (Language of the case: French)
                                                                         (a) annul the Commission’s decision [C(1999) 2539 final] (1)
                                                                              of 20 July 1999 concerning State aid granted by the
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-                     Netherlands to 633 service stations in the region bordering
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the                    Germany and requiring the repayment of State aid granted
European Communities on 18 October 1999 by Patrick Mo-                        by the Netherlands to 450 service stations;
nod-Gayraud, residing in Warsaw (Poland), represented by
Hélène Masse-Dessen, of the Paris Bar, and Viviane Ecker, of the         (b) order the Commission to pay the costs.
Luxembourg Bar, 77 Boulevard Grande Duchesse Charlotte.
The applicant claims that the Court should:                              Pleas in law and main arguments
— annul the Commission’s decision refusing the benefit of                The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as in Case
    free accommodation;                                                  T-248/99.
— order the Commission to pay the applicant damages
    amounting to EUR 91 200;                                             (1) OJ L 280 of 30.10.1999, p. 87.
— order the Commission to pay the costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments
The action concerns the defendant’s refusal, dated 29 June               Action brought on 19 October 1999 by Esso Nederland
1999, to accept responsibility for payment of the rent for               B.V. against the Commission of the European Communi-
accommodation used by the applicant, a French civil servant                                             ties
on secondment as an expert to the Commission’s delegation
in Poland.
                                                                                                 (Case T-242/99)
In support of his claims, the applicant pleads, in particular, the
fact that that decision is contrary to the undertakings pre-                                      (2000/C 20/48)
viously given by the Commission in relation to him.
                                                                                            (Language of the case: Dutch)
He adds that it is not possible to raise against him the argument
that the rent for accommodation cannot be reimbursed to an
official where, as in his case, the accommodation belongs to             An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
the official’s spouse. He never in fact chose to live in an              ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
apartment belonging to his wife; that situation arose as a result        European Communities on 19 October 1999 by Esso Neder-
of the attitude adopted by the Commission.                               land B.V., of The Hague (Netherlands), represented by M.H. van
                                                                         der Woude and R.W. Wezenbeek-Geuke, of the Brussels Bar,
                                                                         with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of
                                                                         J. Loesch, 11 Rue Goethe.
 ---pagebreak--- C 20/24               EN                       Official Journal of the European Communities                                       22.1.2000
The applicant claims that the Court should:                               Pleas in law and main arguments
(a) annul the Commission’s decision (C(1999) 2539 final) (1)
    of 20 July 1999 concerning State aid granted by the                   The applicant company seeks annulment of Commission
    Netherlands to 633 service stations in the region bordering           Decision C (1999) 1363 def. of 11 May 1999 on economic
    Germany;                                                              and financial aid to two sugar manufacturing plants which
                                                                          process all the sugar beet from four Italian regions (Tuscany,
(b) order the Commission to pay the costs.                                Umbria, Lazio and Abruzzo).
Pleas in law and main arguments                                           In the contested decision, the Commission found that:
This case corresponds to Case T-210/99. The applicant claims              — all the financial aid investigated constituted State aid;
that it was not it but the service station operators, who carry
on business autonomously and independently from Esso, that
applied for and received the aid; consequently, it cannot be              — most of the aid was incompatible with the common
required to repay the aid. In its view, the decision is based on               market, and therefore to be refunded.
an incomplete and incorrect assessment of the facts and also
infringes Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty by introducing the
concept of the de facto recipient of the aid.
                                                                          According to the applicant, in reaching that conclusion the
                                                                          Commission disregarded the arguments, information and
(1) OJ L 280 of 30.10.1999, p. 87.                                        figures submitted by the Italian authorities during the adminis-
                                                                          trative procedure. It thus reached a decision which, apart from
                                                                          being insufficiently reasoned, discloses manifest errors of
                                                                          assessment in respect of fundamental questions of law and fact
                                                                          in relation, inter alia, to the relevant Community legislation;
                                                                          the scope and effects of the legislation and measures adopted
                                                                          by the Italian authorities; the content, scope and effects of
                                                                          the legal and economic relationships between the parties
                                                                          concerned; the scope and effects of the various aid packages
                                                                          investigated; the identification of the recipients of the so-called
Action brought on 18 October 1999 by Sadam Abruzzo                        State aid; and the compatibility of that aid with the principles
Spa against the Commission of the European Communi-                       and rules applicable in such cases.
                               ties
                        (Case T-244/99)                                   In particular, it is alleged that the Commission disregarded
                                                                          inter alia the following aspects:
                         (2000/C 20/49)
                                                                          — the protection of the agricultural and industrial production
                                                                               concerned was in this case guaranteed by the relevant
                   (Language of the case: Italian)                             Community rules which allowed Italy considerable latitude
                                                                               to grant production aid;
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the                — the aid given to the two manufacturing plants was entirely
European Communities on 18 October 1999 by Sadam Abruz-                        consistent with the objectives of the national plan for the
zo Spa, represented by Antonio Tizzano and Gian Michele                        sector in question, which had been approved earlier by the
Roberti, of the Naples Bar, and Alberto Maffei Alberti,                        Commission;
Gualtiero Pittalis and Alessandra Franchi, of the Bologna Bar,
with an address for service in Brussels at 36 Place du Grand
Sablon.                                                                   — the difficulties encountered over a certain period by the
                                                                               plants concerned depended on external factors, which did
The applicant claims that the Court should:                                    not in the least diminish their economic potential or their
                                                                               productivity prospects;
— annul (wholly or in part) the Commission’s decision of
    11 May 1999 concerning State aid granted by Italy to the              — the plants in question are located in assisted regions and,
    sugar sector (C (1999) 1363 def.);                                         as confirmed by the national plan for the sector, are
                                                                               essential to ensure a market outlet for products from two
— order the Commission of the European Communities to                          regions of fundamental importance for the cultivation of
    pay the costs.                                                             sugar beet;