CELEX: C1998/166/43
Language: en
Date: 1998-05-30 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 15 December 1997 by João Luís de Sousa Abreu and Others against Council of the European Union and Commission of the European Communities (Cases T-565/97 to T-595/97)

C 166/16             EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                    30.5.98
The applicants claim that the Court should:                        Pleas in law and main arguments:
Ð declare the Council and the Commission jointly and               The pleas in law and main arguments are identical with
    severally liable, pursuant to Articles 215 and 178 of          those relied upon in Case T-316/97 Hermínia Fernanda
    the EC Treaty, for the damage caused by virtue of the          dos Santos Morais Antas v Council and Commission.
    transitional and training measures necessary in the
    sector to which the applicant belongs;
Ð order the Council and the Commission jointly and
    severally to pay ESC 3 126 768 by way of
    compensation for the abovementioned damage,                    Action brought on 15 December 1997 by Fernando
    together with the interest accrued, at the rate of 10 %,       EugeÂnio de Abreu and Others against Council of the
    as prescribed by law, from the date of the summons to              European Union and Commission of the European
    the date on which payment is actually made;                                            Communities
                                                                                  (Cases T-518/97 to T-564/97)
Ð order the Council and the Commission to pay the                                         (98/C 166/42)
    costs.
                                                                                (Language of the case: Portuguese)
Pleas in law and main arguments:
                                                                   An action against the Council of the European Union and
The pleas in law and main arguments are identical with             the Commission of the European Communities was
those relied upon in Case T-316/97 Hermínia Fernanda               brought before the Court of First Instance of the European
dos Santos Morais Antas v Council and Commission.                  Communities on 15 December 1997 by Fernando EugeÂnio
                                                                   de Abreu and Others, residing in Portugal, represented by
                                                                   Cristina Ferreira, Francisco Espregueira Mendes, Teresa
                                                                   Fonseca and Rui GuimaraÄes Lopes, of the Oporto Bar.
                                                                   The applicants claim that the Court should:
Action brought on 15 December 1997 by Maria de Lurdes              Ð declare the Council and the Commission jointly and
Esteves Afonso and Ana Paula Afonso LourencËo de                       severally liable, pursuant to Articles 215 and 178 of
Oliveira and Others against Council of the European                    the EC Treaty, for the damage caused by virtue of the
  Union and Commission of the European Communities                     transitional and training measures necessary in the
               (Cases T-509/97 to T-517/97)                            sector to which the applicant belongs;
                       (98/C 166/41)
                                                                   Ð order the Council and the Commission jointly and
                                                                       severally to pay ESC 3 126 768 by way of
             (Language of the case: Portuguese)
                                                                       compensation for the abovementioned damage,
                                                                       together with the interest accrued, at the rate of 10 %,
An action against the Council of the European Union and                as prescribed by law, from the date of the summons to
the Commission of the European Communities was                         the date on which payment is actually made;
brought before the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities on 15 December 1997 by Maria de Lurdes                 Ð order the Council and the Commission to pay the
Esteves Afonso and Ana Paula Afonso LourencËo de                       costs.
Oliveira and Others, residing in Portugal, represented by
Cristina Ferreira, Francisco Espregueira Mendes, Teresa            Pleas in law and main arguments:
Fonseca and Rui GuimaraÄes Lopes, of the Oporto Bar.
                                                                   The pleas in law and main arguments are identical with
The applicants claim that the Court should:                        those relied upon in Case T-316/97 Hermínia Fernanda
                                                                   dos Santos Morais Antas v Council and Commission.
Ð declare the Council and the Commission jointly and
    severally liable, pursuant to Articles 215 and 178 of
    the EC Treaty, for the damage caused by virtue of the
    transitional and training measures necessary in the
    sector to which the applicant belongs;
                                                                   Action brought on 15 December 1997 by JoaÄo Luís de
Ð order the Council and the Commission jointly and                 Sousa Abreu and Others against Council of the European
    severally to pay ESC 3 126 768 by way of                         Union and Commission of the European Communities
    compensation for the abovementioned damage,                                   (Cases T-565/97 to T-595/97)
    together with the interest accrued, at the rate of 10 %,                              (98/C 166/43)
    as prescribed by law, from the date of the summons to
    the date on which payment is actually made;                                 (Language of the case: Portuguese)
Ð order the Council and the Commission to pay the                  An action against the Council of the European Union and
    costs.                                                         the Commission of the European Communities was
 ---pagebreak--- 30.5.98              EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                   C 166/17
brought before the Court of First Instance of the European         Ð alternatively, annul the fine imposed on the applicant
Communities on 15 December 1997 by JoaÄo Luís de                        by Article 2 of the decision together with Article 4 in
Sousa Abreu and Others, residing in Portugal, represented               conjunction with Article 1 of the decision;
by Cristina Ferreira, Francisco Espregueira Mendes, Teresa
Fonseca and Rui GuimaraÄes Lopes, of the Oporto Bar.               Ð in the further alternative, reduce the fine imposed on
                                                                        the applicant by Article 2 of the decision and annul
The applicants claim that the Court should:                             Article 4 in conjunction with Article 1 of the decision;
Ð declare the Council and the Commission jointly and               Ð order the defendant to pay the costs.
    severally liable, pursuant to Articles 215 and 178 of
    the EC Treaty, for the damage caused by virtue of the          Pleas in law and main arguments:
    transitional and training measures necessary in the
    sector to which the applicant belongs;
                                                                   By the contested decision, which is addressed inter alia to
                                                                   the applicant, the Commission found that, following a
Ð order the Council and the Commission jointly and
                                                                   meeting in Madrid in December 1993, the applicant,
    severally to pay ESC 3 126 768 by way of
                                                                   along with other European producers of stainless steel,
    compensation for the abovementioned damage,
                                                                   had infringed Article 65(1) of the ECSC Treaty by
    together with the interest accrued, at the rate of 10 %,
                                                                   modifying and by applying in a concerted fashion the
    as prescribed by law, from the date of the summons to
                                                                   reference values used to calculate the alloy surcharge (the
    the date on which payment is actually made;
                                                                   alloy surcharge formula') (Article 1 of the decision). In
                                                                   the Commission's view, that practice had been served to
Ð order the Council and the Commission to pay the                  bring about a price increase.
    costs.
                                                                   The applicant was fined ECU 8 100 000 on account of
Pleas in law and main arguments:                                   that infringement (Article 2 of the decision).
The pleas in law and main arguments are identical with             Furthermore, the applicant and four other undertakings
those relied upon in Case T-316/97 Hermínia Fernanda               involved in the concertation were required to put an end
dos Santos Morais Antas v Council and Commission.                  to the infringements of Article 65(1) of the ECSC Treaty
                                                                   and to refrain from repeating the acts or conduct
                                                                   complained of and from adopting any measure having an
                                                                   equivalent effect (Article 4 of the decision).
                                                                   The applicant contests in its entirety that decision
Action brought on 11 March 1998 by Krupp Thyssen                   imposing a fine. In support of its claim, it pleads non-
Stainless GmbH against the Commission of the European              compliance with essential procedural requirements laid
                         Communities                               down by the ECSC Treaty and by the applicable
                       (Case T-45/98)                              legislation implementing that Treaty.
                        (98/C 166/44)
                                                                   In its first head of claim (alleging formal defects and
              (Language of the case: German)                       erroneous findings of fact), the applicant complains of the
                                                                   following:
An action against the Commission of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First                  Ð it was not given adequate access to the files in the pre-
Instance of the European Communities on 11 March 1998                   litigation procedure;
by Krupp Thyssen Stainless GmbH, Bochum (Federal
Republic of Germany), represented by Otfried                       Ð there was no pre-litigation procedure with regard to
Lieberknecht,     Karlheinz    Moosecker      and    Martin             the activities of Thyssen AG in the flat stainless steel
Klusmann, Rechtsanwälte, of Messrs Bruckhaus Westrick                   sector;
Heller Löber, Düsseldorf (Federal Republic of Germany),
with an address for service in Luxembourg at the                   Ð errors in the adoption of the decision;
Chambers of Axel Bonn, of Messrs Bonn & Schmitt, 7 Val
Ste Croix.
                                                                   Ð erroneous assumptions concerning the application of
                                                                        the alloy surcharge formula;
The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                   Ð the matters discussed at a meeting in Madrid between
Ð annul, in so far as it concerns the applicant, the
                                                                        various producers were incorrectly described;
    defendant's decision of 21 January 1998, as amended
    by the defendant's decision of 2 February 1998,
    communicated to the applicant on 6 February 1998,              Ð erroneous assessment of the practice followed in fixing
    concerning a concerted practice engaged in by                       prices;
    European producers of stainless steel with regard to
    alloy surcharges;                                              Ð incorrect assumptions in the various language versions;