CELEX: C2002/233/06
Language: en
Date: 2002-09-28 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court 25 July 2002 in Case C-50/00 P: Unión de Pequeños Agricultores v Council of the European Union (Appeal — Regulation (EC) No 1638/98 — Common organisation of the market in oils and fats — Action for annulment — Person individually concerned — Effective judicial protection — Admissibility)

C 233/4                 EN                       Official Journal of the European Communities                                          28.9.2002
                 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                            incompatible with the common market and with Commission
                                                                                  Decision 1999/509/EC of 14 October 1998 concerning aid
                                                                                  granted by Spain to companies in the Magefesa group and their
                          (Sixth Chamber)                                         successors, in so far as it declared the aid granted to Gursa,
                                                                                  Migsa and Cunosa illegal and incompatible with the common
                                                                                  market, and second, by failing to inform the Commission,
                             2 July 2002                                          within the prescribed period, of measures taken to implement
                                                                                  Decision 1999/509 in so far as it declared aid granted to
                                                                                  Indosa illegal and incompatible with the common market, the
                                                                                  Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under the
in Case C-499/99: Commission of the European Communi-
                   ties v Kingdom of Spain ( 1)                                   fourth paragraph of Article 249 EC and Articles 2 and 3 of
                                                                                  those decisions;
(Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations — State                2.    For the rest, dismisses the Commission’s action;
aid — Aid granted to companies in the Magefesa group —
Commission Decisions 91/1/EEC and 1999/509/EC — Non-                        3.    Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.
                            performance)
                                                                            (1 ) OJ C 79 of 18.3.2000.
                          (2002/C 233/05)
                   (Language of the case: Spanish)
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                   in the European Court Reports)
                                                                                              JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                                                                                                         25 July 2002
In Case C-499/99, Commission of the European Communities
(Agents: G. Rozet and R. Vidal) v Kingdom of Spain (Agent:
R. Silva de Lapuerta): Application for a declaration that, by               in Case C-50/00 P: Unión de Pequeños Agricultores v
failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, the measures                               Council of the European Union ( 1)
necessary to comply with Commission Decision 91/1/EEC of
20 December 1989 concerning aids in Spain which the central
and several autonomous governments granted to Magefesa,                     (Appeal — Regulation (EC) No 1638/98 — Common
producer of domestic articles of stainless steel and small                  organisation of the market in oils and fats — Action for
electric appliances (OJ 1991 L 5, p. 18) and Commission                     annulment — Person individually concerned — Effective
Decision 1999/509/EC of 14 October 1998 concerning aid                                     judicial protection — Admissibility)
granted by Spain to companies in the Magefesa group and
their successors (OJ 1999 L 198, p. 15), declaring that certain
aid to companies in the Magefesa group was granted unlawfully                                          (2002/C 233/06)
and is incompatible with the common market, the Kingdom
of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under the fourth
                                                                                                (Language of the case: Spanish)
paragraph of Article 249 EC and Articles 2 and 3 of those
decisions, the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of: F. Macken,
President of the Chamber, J.-P. Puissochet (Rapporteur),                    (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
R. Schintgen, V. Skouris and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, Judges;                                      in the European Court Reports)
J. Mischo, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a
judgment on 2 July 2002, in which it:
1.    Declares that, first, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed      In Case C-50/00 P, Unión de Pequeños Agricultores (Agents:
      period, the necessary measures to comply with Commission              J. Ledesma Bartret and J. Jiménez Laiglesia y de Oñate): Appeal
      Decision 91/1/EEC of 20 December 1989 concerning aids in              against the order of the Court of First Instance of the European
      Spain which the central and several autonomous governments            Communities (Third Chamber) of 23 November 1999 in Case
      granted to Magefesa, producer of domestic articles of stainless       T-173/98 Unión de Pequeños Agricultores v Council [1999]
      steel and small electric appliances, in so far as it declared the     ECR II-3357, seeking to have that order set aside, the other
      aid granted to Industrias Domésticas SA (Indosa), Manufactu-          parties to the proceedings being: Council of the European
      ras Gur SA (Gursa), Manufacturas Inoxidables Gibraltar SA             Union (Agent: I. Díez Parra), supported by Commission of the
      (Migsa) and Cuberta del Norte SA (Cunosa) illegal and                 European Communities (Agents: J. Guerra Fernández and
 ---pagebreak--- 28.9.2002               EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                                 C 233/5
M. Condou-Durande), the Court, composed of: G.C. Rodríguez                 let, R. Schintgen and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues (Rapporteur),
Iglesias, President, P. Jann, F. Macken, N. Colneric, S. von               Judges; C. Stix-Hackl, Advocate General; H.A. Rühl, Principal
Bahr (Presidents of Chambers), C. Gulmann (Rapporteur),                    Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on
D.A.O. Edward, A. La Pergola, J.-P. Puissochet, M. Wathelet,               11 July 2002, in which it has ruled:
R. Schintgen, V. Skouris and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, Judges;
F.G. Jacobs, Advocate General; D. Louterman-Hubeau, Head of
Division, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 25 July               Article 49 EC, read in the light of the fundamental right to respect
2002, in which it:                                                         for family life, is to be interpreted as precluding, in circumstances
                                                                           such as those in the main proceedings, a refusal, by the Member State
                                                                           of origin of a provider of services established in that Member State
1.    Dismisses the appeal;                                                who provides services to recipients established in other Member States,
                                                                           of the right to reside in its territory to that provider’s spouse, who is a
2.    Orders Unión de Pequeños Agricultores to pay the costs;              national of a third country.
3.    Orders the Commission of the European Communities to bear
      its own costs.                                                       (1 ) OJ C 122 of 29.4.2000.
( 1) OJ C 176 of 24.6.2000.
                                                                                             JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                                                 (Fifth Chamber)
                           11 July 2002                                                                   11 July 2002
in Case C-60/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from                   in Case C-62/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Immigration Appeal Tribunal): Mary Carpenter v                         the Court of Appeal (England & Wales) (Civil Division)):
       Secretary of State for the Home Department (1)                      Marks & Spencer plc v Commissioners of Customs &
                                                                                                            Excise ( 1)
(Freedom to provide services — Article 49 EC — Directive
73/148/EEC — National of a Member State established in
                                                                           (Sixth VAT directive — National legislation retroactively
that State and providing services to persons established in
                                                                           curtailing a limitation period for repayment of sums unduly
other Member States — Right of residence in that State of a                paid — Compatibility with the principles of effectiveness
           spouse who is a national of a third country)
                                                                                   and of the protection of legitimate expectations)
                         (2002/C 233/07)
                                                                                                       (2002/C 233/08)
                    (Language of the case: English)
                                                                                                (Language of the case: English)
In Case C-60/00: Reference to the Court under Article 234 EC
by the Immigration Appeal Tribunal (United Kingdom) for a                  In Case C-62/00: Reference to the Court under Article 234 EC
preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that                  for a preliminary ruling by the Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
court between Mary Carpenter and Secretary of State for the                (England and Wales) in the proceedings pending before that
Home Department, on the interpretation of Article 49 EC and                court between Marks & Spencer plc and Commissioners of
Council Directive 73/148/EEC of 21 May 1973 on the                         Customs & Excise, on the interpretation of Community law on
abolition of restrictions on movement and residence within                 the recovery of sums unduly paid, the Court (Fifth Chamber),
the Community for nationals of Member States with regard to                composed of: P. Jann, President of the Chamber,
establishment and the provision of services (OJ 1973 L 172,                D.A.O. Edward and A. La Pergola (Rapporteur), Judges;
p. 14), the Court, composed of: G.C. Rodríguez Iglesias,                   L.A. Geelhoed, Advocate General; L. Hewlett, Administrator,
President, N. Colneric and S. von Bahr (Presidents of Cham-                for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 11 July 2002, in
bers), C. Gulmann, D.A.O. Edward, J.-P. Puissochet, M. Wathe-              which it has ruled: