CELEX: C1997/318/36
Language: en
Date: 1997-10-18 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 24 June 1997 by Profex Electronic Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH against the Commission of the European Communities (Case T-190/97)

C 318/18             I EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                 18 . 10 . 97
Action brought on 24 June 1997 by Crown Europe                         Action brought on 24 June 1997 by Profex Electronic
GmbH against            the    Commission   of the European            Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH against the Commission of
                             Communities                                                the European Communities
                           (Case T-l 87/97)                                                   ( Case T-190/97)
                            ( 97/C 318/35 )                                                     ( 97/C 318/36 )
                (Language of the case: German)                                        (Language of the case: German)
An action against the Commission of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First                      An action against the Commission of the European
Instance of the European Communities on 24 June 1997                   Communities was brought before the Court of First
by Crown Europe GmbH, whose registered office is at                    Instance of the European Communities on 24 June 1997
Gelsenkirchen,          represented      by   Dietrich      Ehle,      by Profex Electronic Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH, whose
Rechtsanwalt, Cologne, with an address for service in                  registered office is at Tiefenbach, represented by Gregor
Luxembourg at the Chambers of Marc Lucius, 6 rue                       Sobotta, Rechtsanwalt, Muhlheim an der Ruhr.
Michel Welter, Luxembourg.
                                                                       The applicant claims that the Court should:
The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                       — annul       Commission       Decision  REM     20/96      of
—i annul       Commission         Decision  REM       19/96    of
                                                                            19 February 1997, holding the remission of import
     19 February 1997, refusing the remission of a payment                 duties in a certain case on the application of Germany
     of DM 238 352,97,                                                     to be unjustified,
— order the Commission to pay the costs .
                                                                       — order the Commission to take a decision allowing the
                                                                           application for remission of the duties,
Pleas, in law and main arguments adduced in support:
                                                                       — order the Commission to pay the costs,
For the factual background and the legal arguments of the
applicant, which imported television sets from Turkey
between January 1991 and January 1994, and which                       — declare the judgment provisionally enforceable, if
challenges a Commission Decision of 19 February 1997                       necessary on provision of security.
addressed to Germany to the effect that the remission of
import duties in the applicant's case would be unjustified,
reference is made to the explanatory statements in Case                Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
T-l 86/97 0 ).
In addition to the legal arguments in that case, the                   For the factual background and the legal arguments of
applicant alleges an infringement in this case of the                  the applicant, which imported colour television sets
Commission's decision-making procedure, in that, first,                from Turkey between February and September 1992, and
the Commission did not have the applicant's full                       challenges a Commission Decision addressed to Germany
                                                                       to the effect that the remission of import duties in its case
application before it at the time it made its decision, and,
secondly, it is not clear whether the Commission also took             would be unjustified, reference is made to the explanatory
                                                                       statements in Cases T-186/97 and T-187/97 (');
its decision on the basis of Article 5 ( 2 ) of Regulation
( EEC ) No 1697/79 .
                                                                       In addition to the legal arguments in those cases, the
The applicant further argues that the Commission                       applicant maintains that it is not apparent on what
nevertheless supported its Decision both on the basis of               legal basis the Commission's officials carried out their
that provision and on the basis of Article 13 of Regulation            investigations in Turkey. If any facts were obtained at all
( EEC) No 1430/79 . With regard to Article 5 (2 ) of                   by means of those investigations, they were obtained in an
Regulation ( EEC ) No 1697/79, the Commission wrongly                  unlawful manner and, in accordance with the general
determined that the Turkish exporter of the colour                     principle of the rule of law, should not therefore have
television sets had misled or even deceived the Turkish                been used.
customs authorities, and that a provision for the payment
of proportionate duty was discernibly applicable to the
parties concerned.                                                     The applicant submits, moreover, that the television sets
                                                                       were probably produced in the context of inward
                                                                       processing, where the most usual procedure would be
(*) See previous case .
                                                                       for the local customs authorities not to levy any
                                                                       compensatory charges at all . Even if the television sets
                                                                       were not produced in that context, the charges should
 ---pagebreak--- 18 . 10 . 97            EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                   C 318/ 19
have been remitted in accordance with the principle                       Instance of the European Communities on 27 June 1997
of the protection of legitimate expectations, laid down                   by Dr Seufert GmbH, whose registered office is at
in particular in Article 5 ( 2 ) of Regulation ( EEC )                    Karlsruhe, represented by Dietrich Ehle, Rechtsanwalt,
No 1697/97.                                                               Cologne, with an address for service in Luxembourg at
                                                                          the Chambers of Marc Lucius, 6 rue Michel Welter,
(') See previous cases.                                                   Luxembourg.
                                                                          The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                          — annul Commission Decision REM 21 /96 of 25 March
Action brought on 27 June 1997 by Horten AG against                            1997, refusing the remission of a payment of
                                                                               DM 126 828,26 ,
        the Commission of the European Communities
                          ( Case T-191/97)
                                                                          — order the Commission to pay the costs.
                             ( 97IC 318/37)
                (Language of the case: German)                            Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
An action against the Commission of the European                          The pleas in law and main arguments put forward by the
Communities was brought before the Court of First                         applicant, whose predecessor imported colour television
Instance of the European Communities on 27 June 1997                      sets from Turkey in 1992 and 1993 , and which challenges
by Horten AG, whose registered office is at Diisseldorf,                  a Commission Decision addressed to Germany to the
represented by Dietrich Ehle, Rechtsanwalt, Cologne, with                 effect that the remission of import duties in its case would
an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of                   be unjustified, are similar to those in Cases T- 186/97 and
Marc Lucius, 6 rue Michel Welter, Luxembourg.                             T-l 87/97 ( M.
The applicant claims that the Court should:                               (') See p. 17 and 18 of this Official Journal .
— annul        Commission          Decision    REM       14/96   of
     19 February 1997, refusing the remission of a payment
     of DM 123 809,12,
— order the Commission to pay the costs.                                  Action brought on 4 July 1997 by Bo Forvass against the
                                                                                    Commission of the European Communities
                                                                                                  ( Case T-203/97)
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
                                                                                                    ( 97/C 318/39 )
The pleas in law and main arguments put forward by the
applicant, which imported television sets from Turkey                                     (Language of the case: French)
between October 1992 and January 1993 and challenges a
Commission Decision addressed to Germany to the effect
that the remission of import duties in its case would be                  An action against the Commission of the European
unjustified, are similar to those in Cases T- 186/97 and                  Communities was brought before the Court of First
T-187/97 (').                                                             Instance of the European Communities on 4 July 1997 by
                                                                          Bo Forvass, residing in Brussels, represented by Nicolas
                                                                          Lhoest, of the Brussels Bar, with an address for service in
(') See p. 17 and 18 of this Official Journal.
                                                                          Luxembourg at the offices of Fiduciaire Myson sari, 30
                                                                          rue de Cessange .
                                                                          The applicant claims that the Court should:
Action brought on 27 June 1997 by Dr Seufert GmbH                        — rule that the applicant is entitled to be classified in
   against the Commission of the European Communities                          grade A 4, step 4, with effect from the date of his
                         ( Case T-192/97)                                      entry into service, namely 1 February 1996,
                            ( 97/C 318/38 )
                                                                         — consequently, annul the Commission's decision of
                (Language of the case: German)                                 19 March 1997 expressly rejecting the applicant's
                                                                               complaint,
An action against the Commission of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First                        — order the defendant to pay all the costs.