CELEX: C1996/031/20
Language: en
Date: 1996-02-03 00:00:00
Title: Reference for a preliminary ruling by order of the Tribunale di Salerno of 12 October 1995 in the proceedings brought before that court by Somalfruit SpA and Camar SpA against the Ministero delle Finanze and Ministero del Commercio con l'Estero (Case C-369/95)

No C 31 / 10            EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                    3 . 2 . 96
The appellant claims that the Court should:                              1995 by the Commission of the European Communities,
                                                                         represented by Francisco Enrique Gonzalez-Diaz and
1 . set aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of             Richard Lyal, members of the Legal Service, acting as agents,
      13 September 1995 in Joined Cases T-244/93 and                     with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of
     T-486/93 TWD Textilwerke Deggendorf GmbH v.                         Carlos Gomez de la Cruz, Centre Wagner, Kirchberg.
     Commission ( ! );
                                                                         The appellant claims that the Court should :
2.   declare     void   Article    2  of   Commission       Decision
     91/391 /EEC of 26 March 1991 on aid granted by the                  — quash the judgment of the Court of First Instance ( First
     German Government to TWD Textilwerke Deggendorf                          Chamber, extended composition ) of 18 September 1995
     GmbH ( OJ 1991 No L 215 , p. 16 ) and Article 2 of                       in Case T-548/93 , Ladbroke Racing Limited v.
     Commission Decision 92/330/EEC of 18 December                            Commission of the European Communities in so far
      1991 on aid by Germany to that undertaking ( OJ 1992                    as it annuls the Commission's decision contained in the
     No L 183 , p. 36 );                                                      letter dated 29 July 1993 rejecting the Ladbroke
                                                                              Racing Limited complaint of 24 November 1989
3 . order the Commission to pay the costs .                                   ( IV/33.374 ),
                                                                         — dismiss       the   application      under Article 173     as
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                           unfounded,
Infringement of Community law: the appellant repeats the                 — order the applicant to pay the costs in both levels of
pleas advanced by it in the proceedings at first instance (2 )                jurisdiction.
and further complains that the Court of First Instance
reinterpreted the contested decisions in an inadmissible
manner as meaning that the Commission had declared the                   Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
new aid incompatible with the common market until such
time as the old aid was repaid . The Court of First Instance             The Commission submits that the judgment of the Court of
                                                                         First Instance is vitiated by errors of law and should be set
should in that regard have disregarded the wording and
scheme of the Commission decisions, and was entitled to                  aside . First, the judgment erred in law in formulating a
rely only on the considerations set out in the Commission's              general principle according to which the Commission must
statement of reasons; however, such considerations are                   examine the compatibility with the Treaty of legislation
                                                                         imposing obligations previously included in private
subordinate to the operative part of a decision . Moreover,
the reinterpretation applied to Article 1 of the decisions is in
                                                                         agreements before examining the applicability of Articles 85
                                                                         and 86 to these agreements . Second, the judgment ignores
any event inadmissible since it is only Article 2 thereof which
is being contested.                                                      the fact that, irrespective of the compatibility of French
                                                                         legislation with the Treaty, the Commission found that
                                                                         there were no infringements of Articles 85 and 86 of the
(') OJ No C 286 , 28 . 10 . 1995 , p . 8 .                               Treaty. That is to say, the Commission had sufficient
(2 ) As to those advanced in Case T-244/93 ( previously Case             grounds to reject the Applicant's complaint relating to the
     C-161 /91 ), see OJ No C 212 , 14 . 8 . 1991 , p. 10; as to those   alleged infringement of Articles 85 and 86 by the
     advanced in Case T-486/93 ( previously Case C-220/92 ), see
     OJ No C 167, 4 . 7 . 1992 , p. 8 .
                                                                         undertakings without having to determine whether or not
                                                                         the French legislation was incompatible with the Treaty.
                                                                         Third, the judgment is not adequately reasoned .
                                                                         (') OJ No C 286 , 28 . 10 . 1995 , p . 12 .
Appeal brought on 22 November 1995 by the Commission
of the European Communities against the judgment
delivered on 18 September 1995 by the First Chamber
( extended composition ) of the Court of First Instance of the           Reference for a preliminary ruling by order of the Tribunale
European Communities in Case T-548/93 ( J ) between                      di Salerno of 12 October 1995 in the proceedings brought
Ladbroke Racing Ltd and the Commission of the European                   before that court by Somalfruit SpA and Camar SpA against
       Communities, supported by the French Republic                     the Ministero delle Finanze and Ministero del Commercio
                         ( Case C-359/95 P)                                                         con l'Estero
                             ( 96/C 31/19 )                                                      ( Case C-369/95 )
                                                                                                     96/C 31 /20 )
An appeal against the judgment delivered on 18 September
 1995 by the First Chamber ( extended composition ) of the                Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
 Court of First Instance of the European Communities in                   European Communities by order of the Tribunale di Salerno
 Case T-548/93 between Ladbroke Racing Ltd and the                        ( Regional Court, Salerno ) of 12 October 1995 , which was
 Commission of the European Communities, supported by                     received at the Court Registry on 28 November 1995 , for a
the French Republic, was brought before the Court of                      preliminary ruling in the proceedings brought before that
Justice of the European Communities on 22 November                        court by Somalfruit SpA and Camar SpA against the
 ---pagebreak--- 3 . 2 . 96                  EN |                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                  No C 31 / 11
Ministero delle Finanze ( Ministry of Finance ) and the                     Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Industrial
Ministero del Commercio con l'Estero ( Ministry of Foreign                  Tribunal, Southampton ( United Kingdom ), by order of that
Trade ) on the following questions :                                        court of 23 November 1995 , in the case of James Paul
                                                                                        Barker against Service Children's Schools
                                                                                                     ( Case C-3 74/95
1 . Should that part of Council Regulation ( EEC ) No                                                   ( 96/C 31 /21 )
       404/93 (') which limits the right to import Somali
       bananas — the so-called right of access, as recognized by
       the Lome Convention of 15 December 1989 , Protocol 5                 Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
       thereto and the Joint Declaration contained in                       European Communities by an order of the Industrial
       Annex LXXIV to the Convention — be considered                        Tribunal,        Southampton          ( United Kingdom ),    of
       valid , in particular inasmuch as it:                                23 November 1995 , which was received at the Court
                                                                            Registry on 30 November 1995 , for a preliminary ruling in
                                                                            the case of James Paul Barker against Service Children 's
       ( a ) establishes different import arrangements for                  Schools, on the following questions :
              traditional bananas, non-traditional bananas and
              bananas in excess of the quota set for that purpose           1 . Do the provisions of Council Directive 76/207/EEC of
              and thus imposes quantitative restrictions;                        9 February 1976 on the implementation of the principle
                                                                                 of equal treatment for men and women as regards access
       ( b ) imposes the requirement to obtain an import                         to employment, vocational training and promotion, and
              document and to lodge a security for that purpose                  working conditions ( l ) permit a Member State to
              — a document which is not purely for statistical                   exclude from the measures required by Article 3 of the
              purposes and is subject to conditions that are                     said Directive, equal treatment ( as regards access to
              onerous and difficult to satisfy;                                  employment ) where the employment in question is to be
                                                                                 at an establishment outside the territory of the Member
                                                                                 State ?
       ( c ) imposes a customs duty of ECU 750 per tonne for
              bananas in excess of the tariff quota ?                       2 . If so, does that permit such exclusion where the
                                                                                 prospective employer is the Member State itself?
2 . Should those parts of Commission Regulations ( EEC )                    3 . Also, if so, does that permit such exclusion where the
       Nos 1442/93 ( 2 ) and 1443/93 ( 3 ), as amended and                       prospective employment is in another Member State ?
       supplemented by later regulations, which limit, reduce
       or restrict unnecessarily and in a disproportionate                  (') OJ No L 39 , 14 . 2 . 1976 , p . 40 .
       manner in relation to the objective pursued the right of
       access of Somali bananas, as guaranteed by the
       Convention referred to in Question 1 and by Council
       Regulation ( EEC ) No 404/93 , be considered valid, in
       particular inasmuch as they :
                                                                            Action brought on 30 November 1995 by the Commission
                                                                            of the European Communities against the Hellenic
        ( a ) set the final date for the submission of applications                                         Republic
              for import licences up to three months and three                                         Case C-375/95 )
              weeks before the transaction and limit the period
              for submitting applications to one ( full ) week on                                        ( 96/C 31 /22
              only four occasions a year;
                                                                            An action against the Hellenic Republic was brought before
                                                                            the Court of Justice on 30 November 1995 by the
        ( b ) provide, in the event of non-compliance with the              Commission of the European Communities, represented by
              deadline , for forfeiture , in all cases, of the right to     Dimitrios Gouloussis, Legal Adviser to the Commission,
              import for an entire quarter, without laying down             with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of
               specific rules or derogations for situations of force         Carlo Gomez de la Cruz, of the Commission's Legal Service,
              majeure, unforeseeable circumstances and similar              Wagner Centre .
               situations ;
                                                                            The applicant claims that the Court should:
        ( c ) make the issue of the licence subject to the prior
               deposit of a security ?                                       1 . declare that, by introducing and maintaining in force in
                                                                                  connection with the taxation of imported second-hand
                                                                                  cars
0 ) OJ No L 47, 25 . 2 . 1993 , p . 1 .
( 2 ) OJ No L 142 , 12 . 6 . 1993 , p . 6 .                                       ( a ) Article 1 of Law No 363/1976 ( as amended by Law
 ( 3 ) OJ No L 142 , 12 . 6 . 1993 , t5 . 16 .                                          No 1676/1986 ) on the calculation, in connection
                                                                                        with the special consumption tax, of the taxable
                                                                                        value, with a deduction of only 5 % for each year of
                                                                                        use, up to a maximum of 20% , from the selling
                                                                                        price of equivalent new vehicles; and