CELEX: C1995/315/44
Language: en
Date: 1995-11-25 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 16 October 1995 by Areacova, SA, Armadora José Pereira, SA, Armadores Pesqueros de Aldán, SA, Centropesca, SA, Chymar, SA, Eloymar, SA, Exfaumar, SA, Farpespan, SL, Freiremar, SA, Hermandos Gandón, SA, Heroya, SA, Hiopesca, SA, José Pereira e Hijos, SA, Juana Oya Pérez, Manuel Nores González, Moradiña, SA, Navales Cerdeiras, SL, Nugago Pesca, SA, Pesquera Austral, SA, Pescaberbés, SA, Pesquerías Bígaro Narval, SA, Pesquera Cíes, SA, Pesca Herculina, SA, Pesquera Inter, SA, Pesquerías Marinenses, SA, Pesquerías Tara, SA, Pesquera Vaqueiro, SA, Sotelo Dios, SA, Asociación Nacional de Armadores de Buques Congeladores de Pesca de Merluza (ANAMER), Asociación Nacional de Armadores de Buques Congeladores de Pesquerías Varias (ANAVAR) and Asociación de Sociedades Pesqueras Españolas (ASPE) against the Council of the European Union (Case T-194/95)

No C 315/22           EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                      25 . 11 . 95
Action brought on 4 October 1995 by Camping Qualité                    The applicants claim that the Court should :
France against the Commission of the European
                           Communities                                 — annul the applicants ' pension statements for December
                                                                            1994, drawn up pursuant to Council Regulation ( ECSC,
                         Case T-182/95 )                                    EC, Euratom ) No 3161 /94 of 19 December 1994 ,
                          ( 95 /C 315/42 )                                  inasmuch as that regulation lays down a weighting for
                                                                            Germany at the rate fixed for its capital , Berlin , only
                (Language of the case: French)                              with effect from 1 July 1994 and not from 3 October
                                                                            1990 , and , in so far as may be necessary, annul the
An action against the Commission of the European                            decision of the Commission of 26 July 1995 rejecting the
Communities was brought before the Court of First                           applicants ' complaint,
Instance of the European Communities on 4 October 1995
by Camping Qualité France, an association whose registered             — reinstate the applicants' pension rights in full , weighted
office is in Paris , represented by Jean-Michel Roche and                   at the rate fixed for Berlin since 3 October 1990 ,
Jean-Claude Cohen, of the Paris Bar, with an address for               — order the defendant to pay default interest on the
service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Stef Oostvogels,                   pension arrears for the period from 3 October 1990 to
 13 Rue Aldringen .                                                         30 June 1994 , calculated in relation to the same period,
                                                                            at the annual rate of 10% .
The applicant claims that the Court should :
                                                                       Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
— annul , together with all its legal consequences, the
    Commission's decision of 27 July 1995 , received on                The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as those
    4 August 1995 , demanding from the applicant                       already invoked in          Cases T-l 71 /95 , T- 172/95       and
    reimbursement of ECU 51 405,74 out of the sum of                   T - 173 /95 .
    ECU 90 000 granted by way of Community subsidy for
    its project for the development of a European chain of
    quality outdoor holiday centres .
                                                                       Action brought on 16 October 1995 by Areacova, SA,
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                    Armadora José Pereira, SA, Armadores Pesqueros de Aldán,
                                                                       SA, Centropesca, SA, Chymar, SA, Eloymar, SA, Exfaumar,
The applicant claims, first, that the contested decision is not        SA, Farpespan , SL, Freiremar, SA, Hermandos Gandón , SA,
accompanied by a sufficient statement of reasons, since it             Heroya, SA, Hiopesca, SA, José Pereira e Hijos , SA, Juana
makes no reference to any legislation or individual provision          Oya Pérez, Manuel Nores González, Moradiña, SA, Navales
empowering the Commission to adopt a decision of that                  Cerdeiras, SL, Nugago Pesca, SA, Pesquera Austral , SA,
nature .
                                                                       Pescaberbés, SA, Pesquerías Bígaro Narval , SA, Pesquera
As regards the decision 's content, the applicant considers it         Cíes , SA, Pesca Herculina, SA, Pesquera Inter, SA,
to be unfounded , in that, first, it is based on facts which are       Pesquerías Marinenses, SA, Pesquerías Tara, SA, Pesquera
inaccurate and, secondly , it questions the quality of the             Vaqueiro, SA, Sotelo Dios, SA, Asociación Nacional de
project, whereas at this stage the Commission may only                 Armadores de Buques Congeladores de Pesca de Merluza
verify matters concerning the financial use of the amounts             ( ANAMER ), Asociación Nacional de Armadores de Buques
granted .
                                                                       Congeladores de Pesquerías Varias ( ANAVAR ) and
                                                                       Asociación de Sociedades Pesqueras Españolas ( ASPE )
                                                                                against the Council of the European Union
                                                                                              ( Case T-l 94/95 )
                                                                                                 ( 95/C 315/44 )
Action brought on 16 October 1995 by Franz Becker,
Giuseppe Lisitano, Richard Mirsberger, Gerda                                          (Language of the case: Spanish)
Müller-Maersch, Heinz L. Nörenberg, Wolfram Pütz and
Gerhard Tscheepe against the Commission of the European                An action against the Council of the European Union was
                          Communities                                  brought before the Court of First Instance of the European
                                                                       Communities on 1 6 October 1 995 by Areacova , SA, ( whose
                       ( Case T-l 91 /95 )                             registered office is in Vigo , Spain ), Armadora Jose Pereira ,
                         ( 95/C 315/43 )                               SA , ( whose registered office is in Vigo , Spain ), Armadores
                                                                       Pesqueros de Aldan, SA , ( whose registered office is in Vigo,
               (Language of the case: French)                          Spain ), Centropesca , SA, ( whose registered office is in Vigo,
                                                                       Spain ), Chymar, SA, ( whose registered office is in Vigo,
An action against the Commission of the European                       Spain ), Eloymar, SA, ( whose registered office is in Estribela ,
Communities was brought before the Court of First                      Spain ), Exfaumar, SA, ( whose registered office is in Bueu ,
Instance of the European Communities on 16 October 1995                Spain ), Farpespan , SL , ( whose registered office is in Moana ,
by Franz Becker, Giuseppe Lisitano, Richard Mirsberger,                Spain ), Freiremar, SA, ( whose registered office is in Vigo,
Gerda Müller-Maersch , Heinz L. Nörenberg, Wolfram Pütz                Spain ), Hermandos Gandón , SA , ( whose registered office is
and Gerhard Tscheepe , all residing in Germany, represented            in Cangas, Spain ), Heroya , SA , ( whose registered office is in
by Georges Vandersanden and Laure Levi , of the Brussels               Vigo, Spain ), Hiopesca , SA , ( whose registered office is in
Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the offices          Vigo , Spain ), Jose Pereira e Hijos , SA , ( whose registered
of Fiduciaire Myson Sari , 1 Rue Glesener .                            office is in Vigo, Spain ), Juana Oya Perez ( whose registered
 ---pagebreak--- 25 . 11 . 95           EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                   No C 315 /23
office is in Vigo , Spain ), Manuel Nores Gonzalez, ( whose          halibut in NAFO waters in areas 2 and 3 , according to the
registered office is in Marin, Spain ), Moradiña , SA, ( whose       fishing plans approved by the Spanish administrative
registered office is in Cangas, Spain ), Navales Cerdeiras, SL,      authorities for 1995 and in compliance with the TAC
( whose registered office is in Camariñas , La Corunna ,             granted by the Secretaria Española General de Pesca
Spain ), Nugago Pesca , SA, ( whose registered office is in          Maritima . The action brought by the applicants seeks the
Bueu , Spain ), Pesquera Austral , SA, ( whose registered office     annulment of the regulation which provisionally applies the
is in Vigo, Spain ), Pescaberbés , SA, (whose registered office      Agreement concluded between the European Communitiy
is in Vigo, Spain ), Pesquerías Bígaro Narval , SA, ( whose          and Canada in the context of NAFO , reducing the quota of
registered office is in Vigo, Spain ), Pesquera Cíes, SA,            catches of Greenland halibut for the Community fleet to
( whose registered office is in Vigo, Spain ), Pesca Herculina ,     5 013 tonnes as from 16 April 1995 .
SA, ( whose registered office is in Vigo, Spain ), Pesquera
Inter, SA, ( whose registered office is in Cangas, Spain ),
Pesquerías Marinenses, SA, ( whose registered office is in           As regards, in particular, the contested Regulation , the
Marin , Spain ), Pesquerías Tara , SA, (whose registered office      applicants claim that it lacks an adequate statement of
is in Cangas, Spain ), Pesquera Vaqueiro, SA, ( whose                reasons, as required by Article 190 of the Treaty, and
registered office is in Vigo, Spain ), Sotelo Dios, SA, ( whose      infringes Article 8 ( 4 ) ( v ) of Regulation ( EEC ) No 3760/92
registered office is in Vigo, Spain ), Asociacion Nacional de        on the system for fisheries and aquaculture inasmuch as it
Armadores de Buques Congeladores de Pesca de Merluza                 disregards the findings of NAFO's Scientific Advisory
( ANAMER ), ( whose registered office is in Vigo, Spain ),           Committee , which is substantially more favourable to the
Asociacion Nacional de Armadores de Buques                           interests of Spanish fishermen , when establishing the fishing
Congeladores de Pesquerías Varias ( ANAVAR ), ( whose                quota for Greenland halibut for the Community fleet in
registered office is in Vigo , Spain ), and Asociacion de            1995 .
Sociedades Pesqueras Españolas ( ASPE ), ( whose registered
office is in Vigo, Spain ), represented by Antonio Creus
Carreras and Xavier Ruiz Calzado , of the Barcelona Bar,             As regards the international agreement, on the basis of
and by Bonifacio Garcia Porras, of the Salamanca Bar, with           which the contested regulation was adopted, the applicants
an address for service at 78 Avenue d'Auderghem ,                    raise an objection of inadmissibility on the ground that the
Brussels .                                                           Council omitted to consult the European Parliament when
                                                                     concluding the aforementioned bilateral agreement, thereby
The applicants claim that the Court should :                         infringing the formal requirements laid down in Article 228
                                                                     of the Treaty .
— annul Council Regulation ( EC ) No 1761 /95 of 29 June
     1 995 amending, for the second time , Regulation ( EC )
     No 3366/94 laying down for 1995 certain conservation            Furthermore, the applicants consider that the provision
     and management measures for fishery resources in the            which is the subject-matter of the dispute infringes the
     Regulatory Area as defined in the Convention on Future          following principles :
     Multilateral Cooperation in the North-west Atlantic
     Fisheries , inasmuch as it establishes the quota for            — legal certainty , in view of the insufficient and ambiguous
     Greenland halibut for the Community fleet in NAFO                    reasons for the provisional application of an agreement
     areas 3 LMNO at 5 013 , modifying the autonomous                     which is neither known nor accessible to the applicants
     quota of 18 630 tonnes established by Regulation ( EC )              and of the lack of any indication as to the scope ratione
     No 850/95 ,                                                          temporis of the contested Regulation ,
— declare the Bilateral Agreement of Fishing between the
     European Community and the Government of Canada ,               — legitimate expectations and proportionality, inasmuch
     signed on 20 April 1995 in the context of the NAFO                   as it establishes a certain quota as from 16 April 1995
     Convention , inapplicable in so far as it establishes a              which is substantially less than that enjoyed to date , with
     quota for catches of Greenland halibut for the                       no gradual implementation or any accompanying
     Community fleet of 5 0 13 tonnes as from 16 April 1995 ,             measure which might mitigate its negative consequences
     which is below the autonomous quota established by                   for economic operators, and
     Regulation ( EC ) No 850/95 , and in so far as it is the basis
     for     the     abovementioned        Regulation         ( EC ) — relative stability and respect for the traditional fishing
     No 1761 /95 ,                                                        rights of States .
— order the Council to pay all the costs of the
     proceedings .                                                   Finally, the applicants claim that: the abovementioned
 Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                 provision is vitiated by a misuse of powers inasmuch as it
                                                                     gives precedence to the requirements of the commercial
 The applicant companies in the present case own the 36              policy over those of the fishing policy, to the detriment of the
 Spanish freezer trawlers authorized to catch Greenland               interests and acquired rights of the Community fleet .