CELEX: C2000/285/31
Language: en
Date: 2000-10-07 00:00:00
Title: Case T-191/00: Action brought on 25 July 2000 by Werner F. Edlinger against the Commission of the European Communities

7.10.2000              EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                      C 285/17
European Communities on 21 July 2000 by the Regione                     Action brought on 25 July 2000 by Werner F. Edlinger
Siciliana, represented by Francesca Quadri, lawyer, with an               against the Commission of the European Communities
address for service in Luxembourg at the Italian Embassy,
5 Rue Marie-Adelaïde.
                                                                                                 (Case T-191/00)
The applicant claims that the Court should:                                                      (2000/C 285/31)
—      annul the decision of the Commission of the European
       Communities of 22 December 1999;                                                    (Language of the case: German)
—      order the defendant to pay the costs.                            An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
                                                                        ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
                                                                        European Communities on 25 July 2000 by Werner F. Edling-
                                                                        er, of Vienna, represented by Dr Friedrich Fritsch, Rechtsan-
                                                                        walt, Vienna.
Pleas in law and principal arguments
                                                                        The applicant claims that the Court should:
The present action is directed against the Commission’s
decision of 22 December 1999 on the State aid scheme                    —     declare that the Commission of the European Communi-
implemented by Italy for the production, processing and                       ties has unlawfully omitted to take any steps, in response
marketing of products listed in Annex I to the EC Treaty, in so               to his letters of 6 April and 22 May 2000 requesting the
far as it declares the aid granted pursuant to Article 6 of                   same, with a view to having the illegal measures against
Sicilian Regional Law No 68 of 27 September 1995 in favour                    Austria lifted.
of undertakings operating in the agriculture and fisheries
sectors to be incompatible with the common market and
requires Italy to withdraw the aid in question.                         Pleas in law and main arguments
That Law reproduces, in essence, the scheme set up by Regional          The applicant is an Austrian citizen. He states that, following
Law No 32 of 23 May 1991 on intervention in the agricultural            his arrival at Brussels airport on 9 March 2000, a taxi driver
sector. Article 48 of Regional Law No 32/91 provided for the            refused to drive him into the city centre. That refusal was
grant, during the three-year period from 1991 to 1993, of               attributable to the measures which the Portuguese Presidency
assistance with regard to the interest payable to credit insti-         had communicated to the Austrian Government in a statement
tutions and undertakings on operating loans granted for a               dated 31 January 2000 made on behalf of 14 Member States.
term not exceeding one year to traders established and carrying         The applicant maintains that those measures are contrary to
on business in Sicily at least 70 % of whose turnover was               Community law. He claims that the Commission, as the
accounted for by the sale of fruit and vegetables, including            guardian of the Treaties, was under an obligation to adopt
citrus fruits, outside the territory of the Region. Upon being          decisions in order to have those measures lifted. It unlawfully
notified of that measure, the Commission raised no objection            failed to do so.
to it.
In support of its claims, the applicant Region asserts, as its
principal plea, the existence in the present case of a misuse of
powers, infringement of Article 88(1) of the Treaty and
infringement of Article 253 of the Treaty by reason of the
absence of a proper statement of reasons, as well as violation          Action brought on 26 July 2000 by Nuno Antas de
of the principles of the protection of legitimate expectations                      Campos against European Parliament
and of legal certainty. It points out in that regard that Article
6 of the 1995 Law is substantially the same as Article 48 of
the 1991 Law. According to the applicant, once a general aid                                     (Case T-194/00)
scheme has been approved, the Commission should not
undertake an examination of the individual elements of such                                      (2000/C 285/32)
aid. Consequently, in setting out the reasons for which
Article 6 of Law No 68/95 was to be regarded as a new aid
scheme, the Commission totally failed to consider the actual
scope of the provision, arriving at assessments which differed                            (Language of the case: Portuguese)
from and contradicted its previous decision approving the aid.
                                                                        An action against the European Parliament was brought before
                                                                        the Court of First Instance on 26 July 2000 by Nuno Antas de
                                                                        Campos, residing in Lisbon, represented by Carlos Botelho
                                                                        Moniz, of the Lisbon Bar.