CELEX: C1997/318/65
Language: en
Date: 1997-10-18 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 8 September 1997 by C against the Commission of the European Communities (Case T-248/97)

C 318/34                EN                Official Journal of the European Communities                                    18 . 10 . 97
the European Communities on 14 August 1997 by                        Action brought on 8 September 1997 by C against the
Comunidad Autonoma de Cantabria, Spain, represented                           Commission of the European Communities
by Juan Ignacio Saez Bereciartu of the Cantabria Bar.                                           Case T-248/97 )
                                                                                                 ( 97/C 318/65 )
The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                                     (Language of the case: Spanish)
                                                                     An action against the Commission of the European
— annul the reference to Astander from the 11th recital
                                                                     Communities was brought before the Court of First
      in the preamble to Council Regulation ( EC ) No 1013/          Instance of the European Communities on 8 September
      97 and remove the condition that aid provided for in           1997 by C, represented by Valeriano Hernandez Martin,
      Articles 1 and 2 is subject to the restriction of ship         of the Madrid Bar, with an address for service at 2 Calle
      conversions in the aforementioned shipyard.                    Conde de la Cimera, Madrid.
                                                                     The applicant claims that the Court should:
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
                                                                     — declare wholly null and void or non-existent the
                                                                          decision of the appointing authority of the European
The applicant complains that Council Regulation ( EC ) No                 Commission of 30 March 1992 , whereby C's
 1013/97 ('), of 2 June 1997 on aid to certain shipyards                  resignation was accepted and deemed to be definitive,
under restructuring states in the 11th recital that ship
conversions will not be carried out in the shipyard at               — acknowledge the applicant's current status as a
Astander. Although that statement is not expressly                        Commission official and either: ( a ) order payment of
reflected in the body of the Regulation, it is none the less              salary due to him but unpaid since 1 April 1992 ; or,
the case that it sets a condition for the award of the                    in the alternative ( b ) find that the invalidity pension
exceptional aid which is provided for in Articles 1 and 2                 to be granted to C following completion of the
thereof. Thus, Article 1 (4 ) refers to the possibility that aid          appropriate procedure should take effect from 1 April
 for the restructuring of the publicly-owned yards in Spain               1992 ,
 may be considered compatible with the common market
 up to an amount and in the forms specified in the                   — order the Commission of the European Communities
 Regulation itself, such aid being nevertheless subject, by               to pay the costs .
way of the recital under challenge , to there being no ship
 conversions carried out in the shipyard at Astander as
 long as it remains in public ownership.                             Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
                                                                     The pleas in law and main arguments are those previously
                                                                     relied on in Case T-27/97 C v. Commission (').
 The applicant claims that the reference to Astander in the
 contested Regulation breaches the reservation expressly set
 forth in Article 189 of the Treaty of Rome in that a                (■) OJ C 181 , 14 . 6 . 1997, p . 15 .
 genuine decision is inserted in the preamble to a
 regulation when it should have been embodied in a
 separate piece of legislation rather than included in vague
 terms in a provision of general application . Although it
 uses a regulation, the Council makes its effectiveness
 subject to the observance of a decision, which is also              Action brought on 8 September 1997 by C against the
 mandatory but which affects the specific persons to whom                      Commission of the European Communities
 it is addressed .                                                                             ( Case T-249/97 )
                                                                                                  ( 97/C 318/66 )
 Moreover, the applicant alleges breach of the obligation to                          (Language of the case: Spanish)
 provide a statement of reasons for measures inasmuch as,
 in its view, it is impossible to understand why a general
 aid scheme is made subject to a restriction concerning a            An action against the Commission of the European
 specific and determined shipbuilding yard . None of this             Communities was brought before the Court of First
 has any basis at all in any accord or agreement which                Instance of the European Communities on 8 September
 might have given rise to a decision of such impact on the            1997 by C, represented by Valeriano Hernandez Martin,
 shipyard concerned and the surrounding districts .                   of the Madrid Bar, with an address for service in Madrid
                                                                      at 2 Calle Conde de la Cimera .
 O OJ L 148 , 6 . 6 . 1997, p . 1 .                                   The applicant claims that the Court should uphold this
                                                                      application seeking the grant of an invalidity pension to
                                                                      him in the terms set out below and order the Commission
                                                                      to pay the costs.