CELEX: C2003/055/95
Language: en
Date: 2003-03-08 00:00:00
Title: Case T-9/03: Action brought on 10 January 2003 by COLDIRETTI — Federazione Regionale Coltivatori Diretti della Sardegna e CIA — Confederazione Italiana Agricoltori della Sardegna against Commission of the European Communities

8.3.2003               EN                          Official Journal of the European Union                                          C 55/39
—     annul, to the extent necessary, the decision notified by             Pleas in law and main arguments
      Note 41280 of the Vice-President of the Commission of
      the European Communities, Mr Neil Kinnock, dated
      25 September 2002, not to include the applicant’s name               The applicant companies in the present case object to the
      in the list of most deserving officials and not to promote           extension by the contested act of the exemption arrangement
      him to grade B1 in the promotion exercise for 2001                   from Article 90 of the Treaty in favour of the French overseas
      (decision in reply to the applicant’s Claim No R 220/                departments.
      02, brought for the annulment of the abovementioned
      decision of 21 December 2001);
                                                                           In support of their arguments, they submit that there is
—     order the Commission of the European Communities to
      pay such costs as the Court may assess.                              infringement of Article 299(2) of the Treaty in so far as the
                                                                           Council adopted the contested measure in breach of the
                                                                           conditions laid down therein. The preparatory acts leading up
                                                                           to the contested decision, particularly the report of the
Pleas in law and main arguments                                            Commission to the Council dated 24 November 1999, and
                                                                           points 3 and 5 of the statement of the grounds for the decision
                                                                           proposal by the Commission to the Council of 23 August
In support of his action, the applicant alleges, first, an                 2002 (COM 2002 473 FINAL) show that the prerequisite
infringement of Article 45(1) of the Staff Regulations and of              conditions for validly authorising an extension of the special
the principle of non-discrimination. The applicant further                 tax arrangements in favour of the overseas departments have
alleges an infringement of the principle of respect for the rights         not yet been satisfied.
of the defence, an infringement of the principle prohibiting
arbitrary proceedings and of the obligation to state reasons, an
infringement of the principle of legitimate expectations and of            As regards Decision 89/688 of 22 December 1989, the effects
the rule ‘patere legem quam ipse fecisti’ and, lastly, infringe-           of which were extended by the contested decision, the
ment of the duty to have regard for the interests of officials.            applicants question its legality on the basis of Article 241 of
                                                                           the Treaty, on the grounds that the Council was not competent
                                                                           to authorise it in 1989. They submit that that decision
                                                                           constituted a derogation from Article 95 of the EC Treaty
                                                                           (now Article 90) and thus could no longer be taken by the
                                                                           Council after expiry of the two-year time period provided for
                                                                           in 1957, in the second subparagraph of Article 227(2) of the
Action brought on 9 January 2003 by Ayassami & Fils                        EC Treaty.
EURL and Others against the Council of the European
                              Union
                          (Case T-5/03)
                         (2003/C 55/94)
                    (Language of the case: French)                         Action brought on 10 January 2003 by COLDIRETTI —
                                                                           Federazione Regionale Coltivatori Diretti della Sardegna e
                                                                           CIA — Confederazione Italiana Agricoltori della Sardegna
                                                                               against Commission of the European Communities
An action against the Council of the European Union was
brought before the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities on 9 January 2003 by Ayassami & Fils EURL,                                              (Case T-9/03)
established in Saint-François (Guadeloupe), and 23 other
undertakings, represented by John Sylvanus Dagnon, avocat.                                         (2003/C 55/95)
The applicants claim that the Court should:
                                                                                             (Language of the case: Italian)
—     Annul Council Decision 2002/973/EC of 10 December
      2002 amending Decision 89/688/EEC of 22 December
      1989 concerning the dock dues in the French overseas
      departments Commission Regulation (OJ 2002 L 337,                    An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
      p. 83).                                                              ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
                                                                           European Communities on 10 January 2003 by COLDIRETTI
—     Declare that Council Decision 89/688/EEC of 22 Decem-                — Federazione Regionale Coltivatori Diretti della Sardegna e
      ber 1989 concerning the dock dues in the French overseas             CIA — Confederazione Italiana Agricoltori della Sardegna,
      departments (OJ 1989 L 399, p. 46) is inapplicable.                  represented by Giovanni Dore and Fabio Ciulli, lawyers.
 ---pagebreak--- C 55/40                EN                        Official Journal of the European Union                                         8.3.2003
The applicants claim that the Court should:                              —     infringement of the rules which govern procedure relating
                                                                               to State aid, inasmuch as the decision was adopted after
                                                                               the expiry of the two-month period from the date on
—     pursuant to Article 230 of the Treaty, declare unlawful                  which the appropriate notification was received.
      Commission Decision No 02/229/EC of 13 November
      2001, published in the Official Journal on 20 March
                                                                         —     failure to assess the aid, when examining its compatibility,
      2002 and, accordingly, annul it in its entirety or in so far
      as necessary;                                                            in the light of Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 (1)
                                                                               of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from
                                                                               the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund
—     in the alternative, order the Commission to compensate                   (EAGGF) amending and repealing certain Regulations and
      the Sardinian undertakings for the damage suffered                       the Community guidelines for State aid in the agriculture
      which is quantified as amounting to EUR 1 300 000                        sector (2000/C28/02) ( 2).
      (corresponding to the regional contribution which was
      not received), together with interest and any readjustment,        —     failure to apply the Guidelines on National Regional
      to be distributed in proportion to the costs incurred;                   Aid (3) and the Community guidelines on State aid for
                                                                               small and medium-sized enterprises ( 4).
—     order the Commission to pay the costs.
                                                                         Finally, the applicants allege failure to state reasons and
                                                                         misapplication to the present case of the derogation under
                                                                         Article 87(3) of the Treaty.
Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                         (1 ) OJ 1999 L 160, p. 80.
                                                                         (2 ) OJ 2000 C 28, p. 2.
                                                                         (3 ) OJ 1998 C 74, p. 9.
The applicants, the two largest prestigious associations in the          (4 ) OJ 1992 C 213, p. 2.
agriculture sector, contest the decision of the defendant which
found contrary to the common market the aid scheme laid
down in Article 21 of Region of Sardinia Law No 21/2000
which provides for the reduction of production costs linked to
the use of fuels other than methane. The object of that scheme
is to compensate for the extremely high cost of heating fuel
available in Sardinia (diesel). According to the applicants,
the contested decision has prevented Sardinian greenhouse                Action brought on 13 January 2003 by Jean-Pierre Koubi
growers from being placed on an equal footing with those in              against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
other parts of Italy and in the rest of Europe, which would                             Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
have made it possible to have free competition in the market.
                                                                                                   (Case T-10/03)
In support of its arguments, the applicants allege:
                                                                                                   (2003/C 55/96)
—     infringement of Article 158 of the Treaty and of Declar-
      ation No 30 on Island Regions, annexed to the final act                                (Language of the case: French)
      of the Amsterdam Treaty.
—     infringement of Articles 2, 3, 5, 12 and 34 of the Treaty          An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
      and failure to apply the principles of equality and                Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the
      proportionality. The applicants point out in that respect          Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
      that the contested decision has rejected an aid scheme             13 January 2003 by Jean-Pierre Koubi, resident in Marseille
      intended to eliminate serious discrimination between               (France), represented by Katia Manhaeve, Avocat, with an
      Sardinian greenhouse growers and other Italian and                 address for service in Luxembourg. Additional party before the
      European greenhouse growers rather than to distort                 Office: Fabricas Lucia Antonio Betere, S.A. Flabesa.
      competition.
—     infringement of Article 32 in conjunction with Articles 33         The applicant claims that the Court should:
      to 37 of the Treaty. The applicants claim that the
      Commission was not entitled to adopt that decision                 —     set aside the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of
      inasmuch as it failed to take the precautions which must                 the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market of
      be taken in a sector such as agriculture in which, as a                  16 October 2002 in Case R 542/2001-4;
      rule, the competition rules are applied only to the extent
      determined by the Council.                                         —     order the Office to pay the costs.