ISSN 0378-6986 Official Journal C 103 Volume 37 of the European Communities 11 April 1994
English edition Information and Notices
Notice No Contents Page
I Information
Court of Justice
COURT OF JUSTICE
94/C 103/01 Judgment of the Court of 2 March 1994 in Case C-316/91 : European Parliament v . Council of the European Communities (Action for annulment — Parliament — Conditions governing admissibility — Act of the Council — Lomé Convention — Financial Regulation — Legal basis) 1
94/C 103/02 Judgment of the Court of 2 March 1994 in Case C-53/92 P : Hilti AG v . Commission of the European Communities (Appeal — Competition — Abuse ofa dominant position — Concept of relevant market) 1
94/C 103/03 Judgment of the Court ( Sixth Chamber ) of 3 March 1994 in Joined Cases C-332 , C-333 and C-335/92 ( references for a preliminary ruling from the Conciliatura di Vercelli and the Pretura Circondariale di Vercelli ): Eurico Italia Sri and Others v . Ente Nazionale Risi (Common organization of the market in rice — Contract duty — Refund) 2
94/C 103/04 Judgment of the Court ( Sixth Chamber ) of 3 March 1994 in Case C-16/93 ( reference for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof, Leeuwarden ): R. J. Tolsma v . Inspecteur der Omzetbelasting Leeuwarden (Value added tax — Supply ofservices for consideration — Definition — Musical performance and the public highway) 2
94/C 103/05 Judgment of the Court ( Second Chamber ) of 3 March 1994 in Case C-316/93 ( reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunal de Commerce, Huy ): Nicole Vaneetveld v . SA Le Foyer and SA Le Foyer v . Fédération des Mutualités Socialistes et Syndicales de la Province de Liège ( FMSS ) (Insurance — Directive — Time limit for transposition — Direct effect) 3
94/C 103/06 Judgment of the Court of 9 March 1994 in Case C-l 88/92 ( reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberverwaltungsgericht fur das Land Nordrhein-Westfalen ): TWD Textilwerke Deggendorf GmbH v . Federal Republic of Germany (State aid — Action against internal measures implementing a Commission decision — Preliminary reference — Definitive nature of the decision vis-à-vis the recipient of the aid to which it relates — Assessment of validity) 3
1 ( Continued overleaf) Notice No Contents ( continued ) Page
94/C 103/07 Case C-52/94 : Action brought on 7 February 1994 by the Italian Republic against the Commission of the European Communities 4
94/C 103/08 Case C-53/94 : Action brought on 7 February 1994 by the Kingdom of Spain against the Commission of the European Communities 5
94/C 103/09 Case C-54/94 : Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Pretura Circondariale di Macerata ( Ufficio del Giudice per le indagini preliminari ) by order of that court of 13 January 1994 in the criminal proceedings pending before the court against Ulderico Cacchiarelli 6
94/C 103/10 Case C-62/94 P : Appeal brought on 15 February 1994 by Mariette Turner against the judgment delivered on 16 December 1993 by the Fifth Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities in Case T-80/92 between Mariette Turner and the Commission of the European Communities 6
94/C 103/1 1 Case C-63/94 : Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunal de Commerce de Mons by judgment of that court of 21 January 1994 in the case of Groupement National des Négociants en Pommes de Terre de Belgique v . SA ITM Belgium and SA Vocarex 6
94/C 103/12 Case C-64/94 : Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Cour d'Appel de Pau by judgment of that court of 8 December 1993 in the case of Ministre des Finances v . Camicas Sari 6
94/C 103/13 Case C-65/94 : Action brought on 15 February 1994 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Kingdom of Belgium 7
94/C 103/14 Case C-66/94 : Action brought on 15 February 1994 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Kingdom of Belgium 7
94/C 103/15 Case C-69/94 : Action brought on 21 February 1994 by the French Republic against the Commission of the European Communities 7
94/C 103/16 Case C-74/94 : Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Pretura Circondariale di Macerata ( Ufficio del Giudice per le indagini preliminari ) by order of that court of 22 December 1993 in the criminal proceedings pending before the court against Gino Stanghellini 8
94/C 103/17 Case C-80/94 : Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Gerechtshof 's-Hertogenbosch by judgment of that court of 16 February 1994 in the case of G. H. E. J. Wielockx v . Inspecteur der Directe Belastingen 8
94/C 103/18 Removal from the register of Case C-314/92 9
94/C 103/19 Removal from the register of Case C-417/92 9
94/C 103/20 Removal from the register of Case C-53/93 9
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
94/C 103/21 Case T-68/94 : Action brought on 7 February 1994 by Edoard Arends against the Commission of the European Communities 9
94/C 103/22 Case T-70/94 : Action brought on 11 February 1994 by Comafrica SpA and Dole Fresh Fruit Ltd & Co . against Commission of the European Communities 10
( Continued on inside back cover ) Notice No Contents ( continued ) Page
94/C 103/23 Case T-7719A : Action brought on 16 February 1994 by 1 . Vereniging van Groothandelaren in Bloemkwekerijprodukten ( VGB); 2 . Florimex BV; 3 . Inkoop Service Aalsmeer BV, and 4 . M. Verhaar BV v . Commission of the European Communities 11
94/C 103/24 Case T-78/94 : Action brought on 18 February 1994 by Hermann Cordes against the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities 12
94/C 103/25 Case T-80/94 : Action brought on 10/1 1 February 1994 by Heinrich-Wilhelm Lôdige and others against the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities 12
94/C 103/26 Case T-81/94 : Action brought on 21 February 1994 by Anni Rau against the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities 12
94/C 103/27 Case T-82/94 : Action brought on 21 February 1 994 by Helmut Fock against the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities 13
94/C 103/28 Case T-83/94 : Action brought on 21 February 1994 by Johannes Milde against the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities 13
94/C 103/29 Case T-88/94 : Action brought on 25 February 1994 by Société Commerciale des Potasses et de l'Azote ( SCPA ) and Entreprise Minière et Chimique ( EMC ) against the Commission of the European Communities 13
94/C 103/30 Case T-89/94 : Action brought on 28 February 1994 by Hubert Remmers against the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities 14
94/C 103/31 Case T-90/94 : Action brought on 28 February 1994 by E. Dan Frederiksen against the European Parliament 15
94/C 103/32 Case T-94/94 : Action brought on 2 March 1994 by J. W. Esselink against the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities 15
94/C 103/33 Case T-95/94 : Action brought on 2 March 1994 by the Chambre Syndicale Nationale des Entreprises de Transport de Fonds et Valeurs ( Sytraval ) and Brink's France Sàrl against the Commission of the European Communities 16
94/C 103/34 Case T-96/94 : Action brought on 4 March 1994 by J. P. Groot against the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities 16 11 . 4 . 94 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 103/1
I
(Information)
COURT OF JUSTICE
COURT OF JUSTICE
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT 2 , the European Parliament is ordered to pay the costs. The of 2 March 1994 Kingdom ofSpain, intervener, is ordered to pay its own costs. in Case C-3 16/91 : European Parliament v. Council of the European Communities C ) (Action for annulment — Parliament — Conditions (M OJ No C 37, 15 . 2 . 1992 . governing admissibility — Act of the Council — Lomé ( 2 ) OJ No L 266, 21 . 9 . 1991 , p . 1 . Convention — Financial Regulation — Legal basis) ( 94/C 103/01 )
(Language of the case: French)
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be JUDGMENT OF THE COURT published in the European Court Reports) of 2 March 1994 in Case C-53/92 P: Hilti AG v. Commission of the European Communities (M In Case C-316/91 : European Parliament ( Agents : initially (Appeal — Competition — Abuse ofa dominantposition — Jorge Campinos and subsequently José Luis Rufas Concept of relevant market) Quintana, assisted by Roland Bieber, Professor of European Law at the University of Lausanne ) v . Council of the ( 94/C 103/02 ) European Communities ( Agents : Arthur Alan Dashwood and Jürgen Huber), supported by the Kingdom of Spain ( Agents : Alberto Navarro Gonzalez and Rosario Silva de (Language of the case: English) Lapuerta , Abogado del Estado ) — application for the annulment of Council Financial Regulation 91/491/EEC of In Case C-53/92 P : Hilti AG, whose registered office is at 29 July 1991 applicable to development finance Schaan, Liechtenstein, represented by Oliver Axster, cooperation under the Fourth ACP-EEC Convention ( 2 ) — Rechtsanwalt, Düsseldorf, and by John Pheasant, Solicitor , the Court, composed of: O. Due, President, G. F. Mancini with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers and J. C. Moitinho de Almeida, Presidents of Chambers, of Marc Loesch, 8 rue Zithe — appeal against the judgment C. N. Kakouris, R. Joliet, F. A. Schockweiler, G. C. of the Court of First Instance of 12 December 1991 in Case Rodriguez Iglesias, F. Grévisse, M. Zuleeg, P. J. G. Kapteyn T-30/89 ( Hilti v. Commission of the European ( Rapporteur ) and J. L. Murray, Judges; F. G. Jacobs, Communities ([ 1991 ] ECR II, p . 1439 ), seeking to have that Advocate-General; R. Grass, Registrar , gave a judgment on judgment set aside, the other party to the proceedings being 2 March 1994, the operative part of which is as follows : the Commission of the European Communities ( Agent : Karen Banks, assisted by Nicholas Forwood QC ), interveners : Bauco ( UK ) Ltd, whose registered office is at 1 , the application is dismissed; Chessington, United Kingdom, represented by Clifford No C 103/2 Official Journal of the European Communities 11 . 4 . 94
George Miller , Solicitor, with an address for service in Díez de Velasco, C. N. Kakouris ( Rapporteur), F. A. Luxembourg at the Chambers of Elvinger and Hoss, 15 côte Schockweiler and P. J. G. Kapteyn, Judges ; M. Darmon, d'Eich, and Profix Distribution Ltd , whose registered office Advocate-General; H. von Holstein, Deputy Registrar, gave is at West Bromwich, United Kingdom , represented by a judgment on 3 March 1994, the operative part of which is Malcolm Titcomb , Solicitor, and Paul Lasok, Barrister, with as follows : an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Falz et Associés , 6 rue Heine — the Court, composed of: 1 . the second paragraph ofArticle 40 (3) ofthe Treaty is to G. F. Mancini, President of Chamber, acting as President, be interpreted as meaning that non-reimbursement ofan J. C. Moitinho de Almeida and D. A. O. Edward ( Presidents internal tax imposed only on domestic products when of Chambers ), R. Joliet, F. A. Schockweiler, G. C. Rodriguez they are purchased or processed and which is intended Iglesias, F. Grévisse ( Rapporteur), M. Zuleeg and J. L. to build up a fund to promote national production does Murray, Judges; F. G. Jacobs, Advocate-General; L. not, where those products are exported, create Hewlett, Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a judgment discrimination against the traders who bear the burden on 2 March 1994, the operative part of which is as of the charge; follows : 2 . Article 17 (2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1418/76 1 , the appeal is dismissed; of 21 June 1976 on the common organization of the market in rice, which concerns export refunds, is to be 2 , Bauco's claim that the amount of the fine imposed on interpreted as meaning that it does not preclude Hilti by Commission Decision 88/138/EEC of non-reimbursement of a tax possessing the features 22 December 1987 relating to a proceeding under mentioned above to the exporter of the product in Article 86 of the EEC Treaty be increased is question, unless that tax appears to be a means of dismissed; reducing the amount of the export refunds.
3 , the appellant is ordered to pay the costs. í 1 ) OJ No C 230, 8 . 9 . 1992 . ( 2 ) OJ No L 166, 25 . 6 . 1976, p . 1 . 0 ) OJ No C 86, 7 . 4 . 1992 .
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT JUDGMENT OF THE COURT ( Sixth Chamber) ( Sixth Chamber) of 3 March 1994 of 3 March 1994 in Case C-1 6/93 ( reference for a preliminary ruling from the in Joined Cases C-332/92, C-333/92 and C-335/92 Gerechtshof, Leeuwarden): R. J. Tolsma v. Inspecteur der (references for a preliminary ruling from the Conciliatura di Omzetbelasting Leeuwarden f 1 ) Vercelli and the Pretura Circondariale di Vercelli): Eurico (Value added tax — Supply ofservices for consideration — Italia Srl and Others v. Ente Nazionale Risi (M Definition — Musical performance and the public (Common organization of the market in rice — Contract highway) duty — Refund) ( 94/C 103/04 ) ( 94/C 103/03 ) (Language of the case: Dutch) (Language of the case: Italian) (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published in the European Court Reports) published in the European Court Reports) In Case C- 1 6/9 3 : reference to the Court under Article 177 of In Joined Cases C-332, C-333 and C-335/92 : references to the EC Treaty by the Gerechtshof ( Regional Court of the Court under Article 177 of the EC Treaty by the Appeal ), Leeuwarden (Netherlands ), for a preliminary Conciliatura di Vercelli ( Lay Magistrate's Court for ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between Vercelli ) and the Pretura Circondariale di Vercelli ( District R. J. Tolsma and Inspecteur der Omzetbelasting Magistrate's Court for Vercelli ) for a preliminary ruling in Leeuwarden on the interpretation of Article 2 ( 1 ) of the the proceedings pending before those courts between Eurico Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the Sri, Viazzo Sri and F & P SpA, and Ente Nazionale Risi — on harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to the interpretation of Articles 40 ( 3 ) and 5 of the EC Treaty turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax : and also Article 17 ( 2 ) of Council Regulation ( EEC ) uniform basis of assessment ( 2 ) — the Court ( Sixth No 1418/76 of 21 June 1976 on the common organization Chamber), composed of: G. F. Mancini, President of the of the market in rice ( 2 ) — the Court ( Sixth Chamber), Chamber, C. N. Kakouris, F. A. Schockweiler ( Rapporteur), composed of G. F. Mancini , President of the Chamber, M. P. J. G. Kapteyn and J. L. Murray, Judges; C. O. Lenz, 11 . 4 . 94 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 103/3
Advocate-General ; J.-G . Giraud , Registrar, gave a judgment rights for individuals which the national courts must on 3 March 1994, the operative part of which is as protect. follows : (!) OJ No C 189 , 13 . 7 . 1993 . Article 2 (1 ) of the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EE C of ( 2 ) OJ No L 8 , 11 . 1 . 1984 . 17 May 1977 on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment, must be interpreted as meaning that the 'supply of services JUDGMENT OF THE COURT effected for consideration ' within the meaning of that provision does not include an activity consisting in playing of 9 March 1994 music on the public highway, for which no remuneration is in Case C-188/92 ( reference for a preliminary ruling stipulated, even if the musician solicits money and receives from the Oberverwaltungsgericht fiir das Land sums whose amount is however neither quantified nor Nordrhein-Westfalen): TWD Textilwerke Deggendorf quantifiable . GmbH v. Federal Republic of Germany (*) (State aid — Action against internal measures implementing 0 ) OJ No C 46 , 18 . 2 . 1993 . a Commission decision — Preliminary reference — ( 2 ) OJ No L 145 , 13 . 6 . 1977 . Definitive nature ofthe decision vis-à-vis the recipient ofthe aid to which it relates — Assessment of validity) ( 94/C 103/06 ) (Language of the case: German) JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be ( Second Chamber ) published in the European Court Reports) of 3 March 1994 In Case C-188/92 : reference to the Court under Article 177 in Case C-316/93 ( reference for a preliminary ruling by the of the EC Treaty by the Oberverwaltungsgericht fiir das Tribunal de Commerce, Huy ): Nicole Vaneetveld v. SA Le Land Nordrhein-Westfalen ( Higher Administrative Court Foyer and SA Le Foyer v. Fédération des Mutualités for North Rhine-Westphalia , Federal Republic of Germany ) Socialistes et Syndicales de la Province de Liège for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before (FMSS ) O that court between TWD Textilwerke Deggendorf GmbH (Insurance — Directive — Time limit for transposition — and Federal Republic of Germany — on the definitive nature Direct effect) of Commission Decision 86/509/EEC of 21 May 1986 on { 941C 103/05 ) aid granted by the Federal Republic of Germany and the Land of Bavaria to a producer of polyamide and polyester (Language of the case: French) yarn situated in Deggendorf ( 2 ), vis-à-vis the recipient of the aid to which it relates , after the expiry of the time limit (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be prescribed by the third paragraph of Article 173 of the EEC published in the European Court Reports) Treaty for bringing an action, and on the validity of that Decision — the Court, composed of: O. Due, President, J. C. In Case C-316/93 : reference to the Court under Article 177 Moitinho de Almeida and M. Dfez de Velasco , Presidents of of the EC Treaty by the Tribunal de Commerce Chambers , F. A. Schockweiler, G. C. Rodriguez Iglesias ( Commercial Court), Huy ( Belgium ), for a preliminary ( Rapporteur), F. Grévisse, M. Zuleeg, P. J. G. Kapteyn and ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between J. L. Murray, Judges; F. G. Jacobs, Advocate-General ; L. Nicole Vaneetveld and SA Le Foyer and between SA Le Hewlett, Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a judgment Foyer and Fédération des Mutualités Socialistes et on 9 March 1994 , the operative part of which is as Syndicales de la Province de Liège ( FMSS ) on the follows : interpretation of the Second Council Directive 84/5/EEC of 30 December 1983 on the approximation of the laws of the The national court is bound by a Commission decision Member States relating to insurance against civil liability in adopted pursuant to Article 93 (2) of the Treaty where, in respect of the use of motor vehicles ( 2 ) — the Court ( Second view of the implementation of that decision by the national Chamber ), composed of: G. F. Mancini , President of the authorities, the recipient of the aid to which the Chamber , F. A. Schockweiler ( Rapporteur ) and J. L. implementation measures are addressed brings before it an Murray, Judges; F. G. Jacobs, Advocate-General; L. action in which it pleads the unlawfulness of the Hewlett, Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a judgment Commission's decision and where that recipient of aid, on 3 March 1994, the operative part of which is as although informed in writing by the Member State of the follows : Commission's decision, did not bring an action against that decision pursuant to the second paragraph ofArticle 1 73 of the Second Council Directive 84/5/EEC of 30 December the Treaty, or did not do so within the period 1983 on the approximation of the laws of the Member prescribed. States relating to insurance against civil liability in respect of (') OJ No C 167, 4 . 7 . 1992 . the use of motor vehicles must be interpreted as meaning ( 2 ) OJ No L 300, 24 . 10 . 1986 , p . 34 . that, before the date of 31 December 1988 laid down by Article 5 (2), the provisions of that Directive did not create No C 103/4 Official Journal of the European Communities 11 . 4 . 94
Action brought on 7 February 1994 by the Italian Republic would seem to entail applying for the 1989/90 marketing against the Commission of the European Communities year the Istat figures for 1990 , gathered using the more ( Case C-52/94 ) accurate method . On that ground alone , the financial adjustment made by the Commission should already be ( 94/C 103/07 ) reduced by Lit 138 596 340 000 . However, it should also be noted that the Commission has only taken account of excess deliveries , without giving consideration to the fact that, at An action against the Commission of the European the same time, by its own reckoning, there had been a Communities was brought before the Court ofJustice of the reduction in direct sales, which remained well below the European Communities on 7 February 1994 by the Italian guaranteed national quota ( quota not used up : 293 000 Republic, represented by Professor Luigi Ferrari Bravo , tonnes ). The offset between deliveries and direct sales could acting as Agent, assisted by Oscar Fiumara , Avvocato dello not be ignored, having a solid legal basis in Article 6 ( 1 ) of Stato, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 857/84 which applies in Italian Embassy, 5 rue Marie-Adelaide . extenso .
The applicant claims that the Court should : The decision is also vitiated on account of its negative reservation, if indeed it has to be understood as meaning — annul Commission Decision C ( 93 ) 3364 final of 25 November 1993 on the clearance of the accounts that the Commission may still order the re-introduction of a more onerous adjustment for Italy . presented by the Member States in respect of the expenditure for 1990 of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund ( EAGGF), Guarantee Section, in so far as , in the clearance of the accounts presented by the Italian Republic in respect of the ( Financial adjustment of Lit 12 037 322 985 in respect of expenditure for 1990 , it disallowed the sum of Lit the EAGGF's disallowing the allowance granted by the 526 309 029 147 plus Lit 12 037 322 985 for the Italian authorities in respect of the temporary suspension of reasons set out, milk production.)
— order the Commission to pay the costs . Infringement and misapplication of Articles 1 , 3 and 5 of Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 729/70 of 21 April 1970 , Article 8 of Commission Regulation ( EEC ) No 1723/72 of Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support: 26 July 1972 , the rules on the supplementary co-responsibility levy in the milk sector ( Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 804/68 , as subsequently amended ), Council ( Financial adjustment of Lit 526 309 029 147 in order to Regulation ( EEC ) No 857/84 and in particular the rules on recover the additional levy which the Italian State should the temporary suspension of part of the reference quantity have collected in the milk and milk products sector .) ( Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 775/87 ( 7), as amended by Regulations ( EEC ) No 1116/89 and ( ECC ) No 3882/89 ( 8 ). Misuse of powers — Failure to provide a statement of Infringement and misapplication of Articles 1 , 3 and 5 of reasons : Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 729/70 f 1 ), Article 8 of Commission Regulation ( EEC ) No 1723/72 ( 2 ), the rules on the supplementary co-responsibility levy in the milk sector — the statement that for 1989/90 'the system was not ( Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 804/68 ( 3 ), as subsequently applied correctly in Italy' is groundless . In the marketing amended ) and Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 857/84 ( 4 ). year 1989/90 , unlike the preceding years, the milk quota Missuse of powers — Failure to provide a statement of system was applied in Italy also , through the adoption of reasons . Invalidity ( raised as a subsidiary issue under detailed provisions . Its application proved Article 184 of the EC Treaty ) of Council Regulation ( EEC ) unsatisfactory, for reasons which only subsequently No 856/84 ( 5 ): the new Decision , hereby contested , like the became clear , but involved the implementation, albeit preceding Decisions which have already been contested ( 6 ), partial, of the quota system . The Commission's position does not reflect or justify the basis on which the Commission does not seem acceptable, in that with regard to Belgium, fixed the amount of deliveries and direct sales of milk in Italy the Netherlands , Spain and Luxembourg, it has not for the period 1989/90 , by reference to which the additional considered the full application of the quotas as a levy payable is to be calculated . That prevents the Italian precondition for the suspensory allowance , authorities from making any assessment regarding the basis of the new Decision . Istat has implemented a revised method of calculating its data from 1990 ( which does not allow a comparison with data from before 1 January 1990 ) and — to grant the allowance in respect of Unalat products is therefore there are no Istat figures available for deliveries in absolutely consistent with the Community legislation in the 1989/90 marketing year . Hence the proper approach force in the period 1989/90 . Relations between Unalat 11 . 4 . 94 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 103/5
and its own members , so far as concerns the use of the over-production does not serve the ultimate object of suspensory allowance, are entirely outside the curbing the increase in milk production nor does it take Commission's power of assessment because the recipient account of the diversity of situations among individual of the suspensory allowance was Unalat alone , in its Member States , as required by Article 5c of Regulation capacity as holder of the quota . ( EEC ) No 856/84 ( l ), nor does it allow for the necessary adaptation and development of structures . ( ! ) Official Journal, English Special Edition 1970 I, p . 218 . ( 2 ) Official Journal, English Special Edition , Second Series , III , European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund, p . 109 . — Breach of the principle of proportionality : the ( 3 ) Official Journal , English Special Edition 1968 I , p . 176 . requirement to pay such a large sum is disproportionate ( 4 ) OJ No L 90 , 1 . 4 . 1984 , p . 13 . both to the alleged infringement of Community ( 5 ) OJ No L 90, 1 . 4 . 1984, p . 10 . ( 6 ) See Cases C-415/92 ( OJ No C 33 , 5 . 2 . 1 993 , p . 9 ) and C-455/92 legislation on reduction of milk production and the ( OJ No C 18 , 21 . 1 . 1994 , p . 10 ). damage which may possibly have been done to ( 7 ) OJ No L 78 , 20 . 3 . 1987, p . 5 . Community policy in that sector, particularly if account ( 8 ) OJ No L 1 18 , 29 . 4 . 1989 , p . 8 , and OJ No L 378 , 27 . 12 . 1989 , is had of the fact that the data on the basis of which the p . 6 , respectively . total reference quantity was calculated were very far from corresponding to the actual state of the milk sector in Spain .
That disproportionality is also evident when the amount of Pta 29 492 000 000 is compared with that which Action brought on 7 February 1994 by the Kingdom of Spain has obtained from the Community in the milk Spain against the Commission of the European sector during the 1990 financial year, namely Pta Communities 23 133 000 000 . ( Case C-53/94 ) ( 94/C 103/08 ) Moreover , that disproportionality is also evident when the amount of Pta 29 492 000 000 is compared with the An action against the Commission of the European cost to the Community budget if the alleged excess of the Communities was brought before the Court ofJustice of the Spanish quota had been eliminated which would simply European Communities on 7 February 1994 by the have amounted to Pta 8 310 000 000 , that is , Pta Kingdom of Spain, represented by Alberto Navarro 21 182 000 000 fewer . Gonzalez , Director-General for Community Legal and Institutional Coordination , and by Gloria Calvo Diaz, Abogado del Estado , of the State Legal Department for proceedings before the Court of Justice , acting as Agents , with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Spanish — Misuse of power : the additional levy was provided solely Embassy, 4-6 boulevard Emmanuel Servais . and exclusively in order to dissuade Community producers from exceeding the individual quantity reference allocated to them . Nevertheless , during the The applicant claims that the Court should : year in question, Spanish producers had no individual reference quantities allocated to them and, — annul the Commission Decision of 25 November 1993 consequently, the threat of payment of an amount by on the clearance of the accounts presented by the way of an additional levy could hardly have made them Member States in respect of the expenditure for 1990 of curb production . On the contrary, the sum now the EAGGF, Guarantee Section, in so far as it concerns required , chargeable to the general Spanish budget, the amount of Pta 29 492 159 232 in respect of the clearly has as its object the recovery of the levy in order additional levy in the milk and milk products sector not to attempt to mitigate, in part, the budgetary problems collected by Spain , and of the Community flowing from monetary realignments since September 1992 . — order the Institution to pay the costs .
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support: Breach of the principle of legitimate expectations : the Commission acknowledged that there was a discrepancy — Non existence of the budgets which allow the between the quota allocated to Spain and actual Community milk quota system to be applied : calculation production when it proposed to the Council that an of the total reference quantity laid down for Spain in the additional quota be granted . Spain could expect only Act of Accession was based on the data in the 1983 that it would be required to comply strictly from 1993 yearbook of agricultural statistics which was not a true with the conditions laid down by the Council for the reflection of the milk products sector in Spain . To granting of the additional quota and , consequently, to attempt to apply on the basis of incorrect data all the observe fully Community legislation in the milk provisions which limit production and penalize production sector . However, it could not expect that No C 103/6 Official Journal of the European Communities 11 . 4 . 94
compliance with an improperly established quota would European Communities on 15 February 1994 by Mariette be required and that its non observance would be Turner, represented by Georges Vandersanden, of the penalized with the relevant additional levy . Brussels Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the offices of Fiduciaire Myson, 1 rue Glesener, L-1631 (!) OJ No L 90, 1 . 4 . 1984, p . 10 . Luxembourg .
The appellant claims that the Court should : — declare the appeal admissible and well-founded ;
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Pretura — consequently, annul the judgment of the Court of First Circondariale di Macerata ( Ufficio del Giudice per le Instance of 1 6 December 1993 in Case T-80/92 and , in indagini preliminari ) by order of that court of 13 January consequence , award the appellant the token sum of 1994 in the criminal proceedings pending before the court ECU 1 as compensation for the non-material damage against Ulderico Cacchiarelli suffered by her; ( Case C-54/94 ) — make a ruling as to costs in accordance with the ( 94/C 103/09 ) applicable provisions .
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the The pleas in law and main arguments relied on are those European Communities by order of 13 January 1994 of the invoked in Case T-80/92 f 1 ). Pretura Circondariale di Macerata ( Ufficio del Giudice per le indagini preliminari ) ( District Magistrate's Court, (!) OJ No C 300, 17 . 11 . 1992, p . 9 . Macerata, Office of the Examining Magistrate ) which was received at the Court Registry on 8 February 1994, for a preliminary ruling in the criminal proceedings pending before the court against Ulderico Cacchiarelli on the following questions : Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunal de Commerce de Mons by judgment of that court of 21 January 1 . Is Council Directive 90/642/EEC of 27 November 1990 1994 in the case of Groupement National des Négociants en on the fixing of maximum levels for pesticide residues in Pommes de Terre de Belgique v. SA ITM Belgium and SA and on certain products of plant origin, including fruit Vocarex and vegetables 0 , to be understood as applying also to the herbicide at issue in these proceedings ? ( Case C-63/94 ) ( 94/C 103/11 ) 2 . Has the Government of the Italian Republic , by means of the measure implementing the aforesaid Directive , Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the namely the Decree of the Minister for Health of European Communities by a judgment of the Tribunal de 23 December 1992 , and having regard to the Italian Commerce de Mons ( Commercial Court, Mons ) of Government's official interpretation, correctly and 21 January 1994, which was received at the Court Registry precisely transposed the Directive into domestic law so on 15 February 1994, for a preliminary ruling in the case of far as concerns the procedure for sampling and Groupement National des Négociants en Pommes de Terre analysing potatoes in order to check whether the de Belgique v . SA ITM Belgium and SA Vocarex on the maximum levels for residues of active prophylactic following question : substances have been observed ? To what extent is Article 40 of the Law of 14 July 1991 and (!) OJ No L 350, 14 . 12 . 1990, p . 71 . more particularly the third and fourth paragraphs thereof, having regard to the general nature of the terms in which they are couched, compatible with Article 30 of the EC Treaty, where those paragraphs lay down that a sale at a price higher than the price invoiced at the time of supply but with an extremely small profit margin is to be treated as Appeal brought on 15 February 1994 by Mariette Turner equivalent to a sale at a loss ? against the judgment delivered on 16 December 1993 by the Fifth Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities in Case T-80/92 between Mariette Turner and the Commission of the European Commumties ( Case C-62/94 P ) Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Cour d'Appel de Pau by judgment of that court of 8 December 1993 in the ( 94/C 103/10 ) case of Ministre des Finances v. Camicas Sàrl An appeal against the judgment delivered on 16 December ( Case C-64/94 ) 1993 by the Fifth Chamber of the Court of First Instance of ( 94/C 103/12 ) the European Communities in Case T-80/92 between Mariette Turner and the Commission of the European Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the Communities was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities by a judgment of the Cour d'Appel 11 . 4 . 94 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 103/7 de Pau ( Court of Appeal, Pau ) of 8 December 1993 , which Action brought on 15 February 1994 by the Commission of was received at the Court Registry on 15 February 1994 , for the European Communities against the Kingdom of a preliminary ruling in the case of Ministre des Finances v . Belgium Camicas Sari on the following question : ( Case C-66/94 ) ( 94/C 103/14 ) Should the beverage described as sangria , made with more than 50% wine of fresh grapes ( heading No 22.04 ) be An action against the Kingdom of Belgium was brought classified within heading No 22.05 or 22.06 of the Common before the Court ofJustice of the European Communities on Customs Tariff ? 15 February 1994 by the Commission of the European Communities, represented by Gérard Rozet, legal adviser, acting as Agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of Georgios Kremlis , Wagner Centre C 254, Kirchberg .
The Commission of the European Communities claims that Action brought on 15 February 1994 by the Commission of the Court should : the European Communities against the Kingdom of Belgium 1 , declare that, by failing to bring into force the laws, ( Case C-65/94 ) regulations and administrative provisions necessary in ( 94/C 103/13 ) order to comply with Council Directives 91/687/EEC of 1 1 December 1991 concerning certain measures relating to swine-fever (*) and Directive 91/688/EEC of An action against the Kingdom of Belgium was brought 11 December 1991 concerning health and veterinary before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on inspection problems upon importation of bovine , ovine 15 February 1994 by the Commission of the European and caprine animals and swine , fresh meat or meat Communities, represented by Gérard Rozet, legal adviser, products from third countries ( 2 ), and/or by failing to acting as Agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg communicate them to the Commission, the Kingdom of at the office of Georgios Kremlis, Wagner Centre C 254, Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Kirchberg . penultimate Articles of the said Directives and Articles 5 and 189 of the EC Treaty; The Commission of the European Communities claims that the Court should : 2 , order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs .
1 , declare that, by failing to bring into force the laws , The pleas in law and main arguments relied on are similar to regulations and administrative provisions necessary in those in Case C-65/94 ( 3 ); the final time limit for order to comply with Council Directive 90/167/EEC of transposition of the various positions of the two Directives 26 March 1990 laying down the conditions governing expired on 1 July 1992 . the preparation , placing on the market and use of medicated feedingstuffs in the Community ( x ) ( apart (!) OJ No L 377, 31 . 12 . 1991 , p . 16 . from Article 11 ( 2 ) thereof) and/or by failing to ( 2 ) OJ No L 377, 31 . 12 . 1991 , p . 18 . communicate them to the Commission, the Kingdom of ( 3 ) See page 7 of this Official Journal . Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 15 of the said Directive and Articles 5 and 189 of the EC Treaty;
2 , order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs . Action brought on 21 February 1994 by the French Republic against the Commission of the European Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support: Commumties ( Case C-69/94 ) The mandatory nature of the provisions of the third paragraph of Article 189 and of the first paragraph of ( 94/C 103/15 ) Article 5 of the EC Treaty is such as to oblige Member States to take the necessary measures to transpose directives An action against the Commission of the European addressed to them into their domestic legal systems before Communities was brought before the Court of Justice of the the expiry of the time limit prescribed for so doing, and to European Communities on 21 February 1994 by the French communicate them to the Commission forthwith . That Republic, represented by Edwige Belliard and Jean-Louis period, which is laid down in Article 15 of the Directive , Falconi , acting as Agents , with an address for service in expired on 1 October 1991 without Belgium having Luxembourg at the French Embassy, 9 boulevard du Prince implemented the necessary provisions . Henri .
H OJ No L 92 , 7 . 4 . 1990, p . 42 . The applicant claims that the Court should : — declare void Commission Decision 93/673/EEC of 10 December 1993 fixing the flat-rate reduction to No C 103/8 Official Journal of the European Communities 11 . 4 . 94
advances on the entry of agricultural expenditure in the pays the sums recovered to the EAGGF, together with accounts in the event of non-compliance with the the corresponding interest . provisions relating to the forwarding of the annual questionnaire on the application of the arrangements for (>) OJ No L 310 , 14 . 12 . 1993 , p . 44 . additional levies in the milk sector introduced by ( 2 ) Laying down detailed rules on the application of the additional Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 3950/92 (*), levy on milk and milk products ( OJ No L 57, 10 . 3 . 1993 , p . 12 ). ( 3 ) On the financing of the common agricultural policy ( Official order the defendant to pay the costs . Journal , English Special Edition 1970 I, p . 218 ).
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Pretura — Infringement of the fourth indent of Article 8 of Circondariale di Macerata ( Ufficio del Giudice per le Commission Regulation ( EEC ) No 536/93 ( 2 ) and of indagini preliminari ) by order of that court of 22 December Article 11 of Regulation ( EEC ) No 3950/92 ; 1993 in the criminal proceedings pending before the court infringement of essential procedural requirements : against Gino Stanghellini Articles 2 and 3 of the Decision purport to govern ( Case C-74/94 ) situations other than failure to comply with the time ( 94/C 103/16 ) limit for forwarding the questionnaire and therefore cannot have been taken in accordance with Article 8 of Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the Regulation ( EEC ) No 536/93 . In so far as those Articles European Communities by order of 22 December 1993 of can be treated as 'implementing rules' for the additional the Pretura Circondariale di Macerata ( Ufficio del Giudice levy system , there has been a lack of formal consultation with the Member States within the framework of the per le indagini preliminari ) ( District Magistrate's Court, Macerata , Office of the Examining Magistrate ) which was Management Committee . received at the Court Registry on 28 February 1994 , for a preliminary ruling in the criminal proceedings pending — Infringement of Council Regulation ( EEC ) before the court against Gino Stanghellini on the following No 729/70 ( 3 ): the requirements laid down in Articles 1 , questions : 2 and 3 of the contested Decision are only secondary 1 . Is Council Directive 90/642/EEC of 27 November 1990 obligations and failure to comply with them does not in any way compromise the effectiveness of the additional on the fixing of maximum levels for pesticide residues in levy system . The system for withholding advances is not and on certain products of plant origin, including fruit appropriate for use to penalize the failure to observe and vegetables O , to be understood as applying also to such secondary obligations . the herbicides at issue in these proceedings ? 2 . Has the Government of the Italian Republic, by means Furthermore , the sanctions laid down in the contested of the measure implementing the aforesaid Directive , Decision represent definitive sanctions in so far as namely the Decree of the Minister for Health of neither Regulation ( EEC ) No 536/9 3 nor the contested 23 December 1992 , and having regard to the Italian Decision provide that the reductions to advances laid Government's official interpretation, correctly and down should be applied subject to the accounts precisely transposed the Directive into domestic law so subsequently being cleared or any subsequent far as concerns the procedure for sampling and regularization . Moreover, although the Commission is analysing potatoes in order to check whether the not under a duty where it uses its power to reduce maximum levels for residues of active prophylactic advances to initiate proceedings in which the other party substances have been observed ? is given a hearing, as laid down in the final decision on clearance , it must before taking its decision allow the H OJ No L 350 , 14 . 12 . 1990, p . 71 . Member State to present its point of view .
— Breach of the principle of proportionality : the sanctions imposed are by virtue of their automatic nature , their lack of gradation and the size of the amounts to be Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Gerechtshof withheld , totally disproportionate in relation to the 's-Hertogenbosch by judgment of that court of 16 February secondary objective of 'sound administration' which is 1994 in the case of G. H. E. J. Wielockx v. Inspecteur der the aim of the questionnaire . Directe Belastingen Case C-80/94 ) In certain respects, the said sanctions even appear ( 94/C 103/17 ) counter-productive . It is difficult to understand why, as laid down in Article 2 of the Decision , a Member State Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the should be penalized for frauds by operators which it has European Communities by a judgment of the Gerechtshof uncovered by carrying out checks , as a result of which it ( Regional Court of Appeal ) 's-Hertogenbosch of 11 . 4 . 94 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 103/9
16 February 1994 , which was received at the Court Registry Removal from the register of Case C-314/92 [ l ) on 2 March 1994 , for a preliminary ruling in the case of G. ( 94/C 103/18 ) H. E. J. Wielockx v . Inspecteur der Directe Belastingen on the following questions : By order of 21 February 1994 the President of the Court of Justice of the European Communities ordered the removal 1 Does Article 52 of the Treaty establishing the European from the register of Case C-314/92 ( reference for a Community or any other provisions of that Treaty preliminary ruling from the House of Lords ): Ladenimor SA preclude a Member State , such as the Netherlands , from v . Intercomfinanz SA . levying a tax on the income of natural persons whereby taxable persons receiving profits from a business (M OJ No C 219 , 26 . 8 . 1992 . enterprise are accorded the right to constitute a so-called oudedagsreserve, thereby reducing gross income ( see Article 3 ( 3 ) ( a ), in conjunction with Articles 44d and 441 inclusive, of the Wet op de Inkomstenbelasting ( Law on Income Tax ) 1964 in the version in force for the year in question ), if that right is not granted to a taxable person Removal from the register of Case C-417/92 ( x ) who is a national of, and resident in, another Member ( 94/C 103/19 ) State who receives profits from a business enterprise in the first-mentioned Member State on which he is liable By order of 27 January 1994 the President of the Court of to pay the abovementioned tax ? Justice of the European Communities ordered the removal from the register of Case C-417/92 : Ireland v . Commission 2 In that regard, is it relevant that on the basis of of the European Communities . Chapter III of the Wet op de Inkomstenbelasting 1964 ( Taxable Amount in the case of Foreign Taxable (M OJ No C 33 , 5 . 2 . 1993 . Persons ) reductions in the oudedagsreserve do not form part of the taxable Netherlands income of the foreign taxable person , as a result of which , in the prevailing Netherlands taxation system , the connection between the deductibility of contributions to the oudedagsreserve and the liability to taxation of Removal from the register of Case C-53/93 i 1 ) reductions made therein is not ensured with regard to ( 94/C 103/20 ) foreign taxable persons ? By order of 9 February 1994 the President of the Second 3 . It is also relevant whether the foreign taxable person's Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European income is wholly or substantially earned through Communities ordered the removal from the register of Case activities performed in the first-mentioned Member C-53/93 ( reference for a preliminary ruling from the So- og State ? Handelsretten ( Maritime and Commercial Court)): Danske Meieriers Fasllesorganisation v . Kraft Foods A/S .
(*) OJ No C 91 , 1 . 4 . 1993 .
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
Action brought on 7 February 1994 by Edoard Arends The applicant claims that the Court should : against the Commission of the European Communities Case T-68/94 ) — order the defendant to pay to the applicant DM 228 974 ( 94/C 103/21 together with 8 % interest on : DM 69 576,80 as from 1 April 1987, (Language of the case: German) DM 73 624,80 as from 1 April 1988 ,
An action against the Council of the European Union and DM 73 624,80 as from 1 April 1989 , and the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European DM 12 148,00 as from 1 April 1990 . Communities on 7 February 1994 by Edoard Arends, Osteel ( Federal Republic of Germany), represented by Horst Struve , 134 Osterstrasse, Aurich, Norden ( Federal Republic In the alternative declare unlawful the period for acceptance of Germany ). of the offer of 6 December 1993 . No C 103/10 Official Journal of the European Communities 11 . 4 . 94
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support: third-country and non-traditional ACP bananas into the Community under the tariff quota established by The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as those Régulation ( EEC ) No 404/93 . in Case T-20/94 .
The applicants submit that the Commission had no power under the enabling Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 404/93 to apply a reduction coefficient to reference quantities for operators in category A. Indeed , the fact that Regulation ( EEC ) No 404/93 expressly provides such a mechanism for Action brought on 1 1 February 1994 by Comafrica SpA and applications from category C operators , clearly indicates Dole Fresh Fruit Ltd & Co . against Commission of the that this omission is deliberate . Even if, which is denied , the European Communities Commission did have the power to apply a reduction ( Case T-70/94 ) coefficient to reference quantities for operators in category ( 94/C 103/22 A, in the present case, the reduction coefficient was applied to inaccurate figures , on the basis of wrongly calculated reference quantities . (Language of the case: Englisb)
An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Moreover, by applying a reduction coefficient to a tariff Instance of the European Communities on 11 February quota which had not been fixed on the basis of a forecast 1994 by Comafrica SpA and Dole Fresh Fruit Ltd & Co ., supply balance , as provided in Article 16 of Regulation represented by Mr Bernard O'Connor, Solicitor of Messrs ( EEC ) No 404/93 , the Commission acted in breach of that Stanbrook and Hooper, with an address for service in Article . Luxembourg at the Chambers of Arsène Kronshagen, 12 boulevard de la Foire, L-1528 . The applicants next submit that the decision to apply the The applicants claim that the Court should : reduction coefficient was based on provisions of Regulation ( EEC ) No 1442/93 which were illegal . In this context, they 1 , déclaré the application admissible; refer to Article 3 of that Regulation, in which the Commission has identified three separate economic 2 , declare void , pursuant to Articles 173 and 174 of the EC activities in the marketing chain, so as to create three Treaty, the Commission's decision , set out in Article 1 of separate classes of operators within categories A and B. In so the Regulation ( EEC ) No 3190/93 , to apply a reduction defining the types of operators authorized to apply for coefficient to reference quantities for operators in import licences, the Commission states that it has sought to category A for the period 1 January to 31 December reflect the diversity and complexity of marketing structures 1994; that exist in the various Member States .
3 , pursuant to Article 178 and the second paragraph of Article 215 of the EC Treaty, order the Commission to make good any damage caused to the applicants and to The applicants maintain that such an argument would be pay interest; misplaced , in so far the creation of a fixed hierarchy of primary and secondary importers as well as ripeners does in 4 , make any additional orders which the Court considers fact disrupt the existing marketing chain . By giving rights of necessary for the purposes of determining the damage import to operators who did not traditionally import, the caused to the applicants ; Commission has made a fundamental break in the marketing chain. Non-importers now are in a position to 5 , order that the costs of the proceedings be borne by the exclude traditional importers and substitute themselves into Commission . that position . The definition of secondary importers as well as the inclusion of ripeners within the category of operators entitled to tariff quota are ambiguous and appear to give Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support: quota entitlement to those who do not assume the commercial risk . The applicants, two members of a group of companies engaged in the worldwide business of producing, processing, distributing and marketing fruit products, both Finally, the applicants assert that provisions regarding registered as category A operators , as defined by Article 2 of supporting evidence for applications for quota allocation in Commission Regulation ( EEC ) No 1442/93 , contest the Regulation ( EEC ) No 1442/93 are unclear, so that they decisions of the Commission to reduce , through the violate the principle of legal certainty and represent the application of reduction coefficients set out in Commission Commission's failure to administer and manage the Regulations ( EEC ) No 2920/93 and ( EEC ) No 3190/93 , the Community quota in accordance with Community law . In number of licences available to them in the second half of fact, whereas Article 4 of that Regulation is clearly 1993 and in the full year 1994 for the import of mandatory as regards the supporting documents specified in 11 . 4 . 94 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 103/11
Article 7, Article 7 itself appears to contradict this reading form part of a set of rules which are in conflict with and make the provision of supporting evidence optional . European competition law and can in no way be Faced with this ambiguity, some Member States will adopt justified . They provide for levies for no or very few the mandatory interpretation and some the discretionary . It services in return and have merely a restrictive effect on is believed that this contradiction has occurred in the present competition . case with the result that the criteria for entitlement are more strictly applied in some Member States than others . It is believed that, in those Member States with more lax requirements , unmeritorious applications have been lodged Specific complaints against the trade agreements : and granted . The trade agreements now operated by VBA are , in the applicants' view, not different from the trade agreement which the Commission in its decision of 26 July 1988 declared contrary to Article 85 ( 1 ) of the EC Treaty. Action brought on 16 February 1994 by 1 . Vereniging van According to the applicants, the fact that the agreements Groothandelaren in Bloemkwekerijprodukten ( VGB ); 2 . restrict competition within the meaning of that Florimex BV; 3 . Inkoop Service Aalsmeer BV, and 4 . M. provision is demonstrated by the following factors : Verhaar BY v. Commission of the European Communities — the remuneration of 3 % payable by the traders is not ( Case T-77/94 ) justified by services rendered in return by VBA . It ( 94/C 103/23 ) therefore forms an unjustified increase in the cost price for the trader thus weakening his competitive (Language of the case: Dutch)- position,
An action against the Commission of the European — the provision included in the trading agreements Communities was brought before the Court of First whereby sales may be made only to buyers registered Instance of the European Communities on 16 February with the VBA entails a stringent sales restriction 1994 by 1 . Vereniging van Groothandelaren in which runs counter to European competiton Law, Bloemkwerkerijprodukten ( VGB); 2 . Florimex BV; 3 . Inkoop Service Aalsmeer BV and 4 . M. Verhaar BV, all established in Aalsmeer, represented by J. A. M. P. Keijser, — certain traders are accepted for the conclusion of a of the Nijmegen Bar, with an address for service in trading agreement, others are not, on an entirely Luxembourg at the Chambers of the law firm Stanbrook arbitrary basis . That means that some traders are and Hooper , 12 boulevard de la Foire . required to pay 'only' 3 % contributions whilst others are charged a levy varying from 4,2 to 65 % . The applicants claim that the Court of First Instance Thus VBA is in a position to eliminate competitors at should : will, or at least to make their lives difficult . annul the Commission's decision of 20 December 1993 in Cases IV/32.751 ( Florimex/Aalsmeer II), IV/32.990 The view taken by the Commission in its letter of ( VBG/Aalsmeer ), IV/33.190 ( Inkoop Service & M. Verhaar 5 August 1992 , that even if competition is restricted, BV/Aalsmeer ), IV/32.835 ( Cultra ) and IV/32.624 there is no conclusive evidence that trade between the ( Bloemenveilingen Aalsmeer III). Member States is adversely affected in an appreciable manner, appears to invoke the de minimis rule . Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support: According to the applicants that is completely incomprehensible and moreover demonstrably unjust The application is brought against the decision whereby the since what is involved here is part of a turnover worth Commission informed the applicants that on the basis of a billions . Moreover, an appreciable part of that turnover provisional assessment of the applicants' complaints lodged in the end concerns exports to other Member States . against the 'trade agreements I , II and III' and the so-called 'cultra agreements' operated by the Verenigde Bloemenveilingen Aalsmeer ( Associated Flower Auctions , Aalsmeer, 'VBA') it is not appropriate to institute formal — Specific complaints against the 'cultra ' agreements : proceedings and the matter should be closed .
The applicants consider it unjustified for the Commission to According to the applicants the Commission itself found state that it sees no reason to act under Article 85 ( 1 ) or 86 of that these provisions are restrictive of competition, both the EC Treaty against the VBA's manner of proceeding. with regard to commercial activities and to sources of supply, and that the levy is not justified by services on the — General complaints against the agreements operated by part of VBA . VBA : In the applicants' view the agreements — together with By stating that the file contains no conclusive evidence the levies at issue in Joined Cases T-70 and T-71/92 — regarding any appreciable effect on trade between No C 103/12 Official Journal of the European Communities 11 . 4 . 94
Member States — the economic significance within the Rômer, Diemelsee-Adorf; Walter Hoehne, Bremen and relevant market is said to be small — the Commission is Heinz-Dietrich Rothschild , Wistedt ( all in the Federal again ignoring the fact that what is involved is part of a Republic of Germany), represented by Bernd Meisterernst, turnover running into billions and that the turnover to Mechtild Düsing, Dietrich Manstetten and Dr Frank Schulz, which the 'cultra' agreements relate also concerns Rechtsanwälte , Hamm, with an address for service in exports . Thus, according to the applicants, the relevant Luxembourg at the Chambers of Lambert H. Dupong, market is not limited to the Netherlands, nor to a group Dupong and Associates, 14a rue des Bains . of products which can be regarded as a separate market . The applicants claim that the Court of First Instance should : order the defendants jointly to pay to the applicants SLOM compensation in accordance with Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 2187/93 of 22 July 1 993 in respect Action brought on 18 February 1994 by Hermann Cordes of the period stated in the application, together with against the Council of the European Union and the interest at the rate of 8 % for the period as from 19 May Commission of the European Communities 1992 whereby the annual quantity for which ( Case T-78/94 ) compensation is to be paid is also set out in the application . ( 94/C 103/24 ) Specifically application is made for an order that : (Language of the case: German) — the defendants should jointly pay the sums set out in the An action against the Council of the European Union and application together with interest thereon at 8 % from the Commission of the European Communities was brought 19 May 1992 and should bear the legal costs . before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 18 February 1994 by Hermann Cordes, Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support: Bülstedt ( Federal Republic of Germany), represented by Dr Ekkehard Harupa , Horst Griemert, Volker Kramer and The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as those Hans Otto Hoffmeyer, Rechtsanwälte , 11 Bremer Strasse , in Case T-20/94 . Verden ( Federal Republic of Germany).
The applicant claims that the Court of First Instance should :
— declare that the defendants are obliged to pay to the Action brought on 21 February 1994 by Anni Rau against plaintiff compensation for a premium milk quota of the Council of the European Union and the Commission of 110 306 kg for the period 10 September 1985 to the European Communities 29 March 1989 . ( Case T-81/94 ) ( 94/C 103/26 ) Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support: (Language of the case: German) The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as those in Case T-20/94 . An action against the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 21 February 1994 by Anni Rau, Mechernich-Berg ( Federal Republic of Germany ), represented by Dr Lukanov and D. Tönnesmann, Action brought on 10/11 February 1994 by Rechtsanwälte, Bonn , with an address for service in Heinrich-Wilhelm Lödige and others against the Council of Luxembourg at the Chambers of Lambert H. Dupong, the European Union and the Commission of the European Dupong and Associates, 14a rue des Bains . Communities ( Case T-80/94 ) The applicant claims that the Court of First Instance should : ( 94/C 103/25 ) — declare that the defendants are jointly obliged to pay to (Language of the case: German) the plaintiff DM 30 310 for the period from 29 March 1992 . An action against the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities was brought Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support: before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 10/11 February 1994 by The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as those Heinrich-Wilhelm Lödige , Steinheim; Heinrich Sander, in Case T-20/94 . Raddestorf; Klaus Beeker, Bedburg-Hau; Friedhelm Bürehheide , Gütersloh; Heinz Klapp, Wichdorf; Helmut 11 . 4 . 94 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 103/13
Action brought on 21 February 1994 by Helmut Fock The applicant claims that the Court of First Instance against the Council of the European Union and the should : Commission of the European Communities ( Case T-82/94 ) — declare subparagraphs ( a ) and ( b ) of the second paragraph of Article 8 and the fourth paragraph of ( 94/C 103/27 Article 14 of Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 2187/93 of 22 July 1993 invalid, (Language of the case: German) — order the defendants to pay to the applicant An action against the Council of the European Union and compensation in accordance with Articles 1 , 6 and 11 the Commission of the European Communities was brought and the Annex for the period 1 April 1985 to 29 March before the Court of First Instance of the European 1989 . Communities on 21 February 1994 by Helmut Fock, Altengôrs ( Federal Republic of Germany), represented by Dr Lukanov and D. Tonnesmann, Rechtsanwàlte, Bonn, Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support: with an address for service at the Chambers of Lambert H. Dupong, Dupong and Associates , 14a rue des Bains . The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as those in Case T-20/94 . The applicant claims that the Court of First Instance should :
— declare subparagraphs ( a ) and ( b ) of the second paragraph of Article 8 and the fourth paragraph of Article 14 of Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 2187/93 of 22 July 1993 invalid , Action brought on 25 February 1994 by Société — order the defendants jointly to pay to the applicant Commerciale des Potasses et de l'Azote ( SCPA ) and compensation for its unlawful exclusion from the milk Entreprise Minière et Chimique ( EMC ) against the market ( SLOM I and II ) during the period 2 April 1984 Commission of the European Communities to 29 March 1989 in accordance with Article 14 of ( Case T-88/94 ) Regulation ( EEC ) No 2187/93 amounting to at least ECU 72 740 together with interest thereon at 8 % as ( 94/C 103/29 ) from 19 May 1992 . (Language of the case: French) Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support: An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as those Instance of the European Communities on 25 February in Case T-20/94 . 1994 by Société Commerciale des Potasses et de l'Azote ( SCPA ), whose registered office is in Mulhouse ( France ), and Entreprise Minière et Chimique ( EMC ), whose registered office is in Paris, represented by Charles Price, of the Brussels Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Lucy Dupong, 14a rue des Bains .
Action brought on 21 February 1994 by Johannes Milde The applicants claim that the Court should : against the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities — declare Article 1 of the decision partially void in so far as ( Case T-83/94 ) it makes the issue of a declaration that the concentration ( 94/C 103/28 ) is compatible with the common market conditional upon compliance with the conditions set out in paragraph 63 of the decision, (Language of the case: German)
An action against the Council of the European Union and — declare the decision partially void in so far as it has the Commission of the European Communities was brought accepted the commitment mentioned in paragraph 65 of the decision whereby K+S undertook to modify the before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 21 February 1994 by Johannes Milde, corporate structure of Potacan by 30 June 1994 in such a Mechernich-Breitenbenden ( Federal Republic of Germany), way as to enable each of Potacan's shareholders, independently of the other, to market in the Community represented by Dr Lukanov and D. Tonnesmann , Rechtsanwàlte, Bonn, with an address for service at the potash which it has obtained from Potacan, Chambers of Lambert H. Dupong, Dupong and Associates , 14a rue des Bains . — order the Commission to pay the costs . No C 103/14 Official Journal of the European Communities 11 . 4 . 94
Pleas in law and main arguments, adduced in support: The applicants further consider that the undertaking made by K+S with regard to Potacan was accepted by the Commission without the applicants' consent and in violation of their rights ; by acting in this way, the The applicants challenge the conditions attached to the Commission has infringed Articles 2 ( 3 ) and 8 ( 2 ) of Council Commission's decision authorizing the concentration of the Regulation ( EEC ) No 4064/89 . Kali+Salz ( K+S ) and Mitteldeutsche Kali AG ( MdK ) companies and Treuhandanstalt, leading to the creation of a single company under the joint control of K+S and Treuhandanstalt . According to the applicants, the Commission's reasoning is mistaken both in fact and in law as regards the alleged creation of a dominant duopoly : the Commission has failed to show how the agreements between K+S, MdK and The conditions are that : Treuhandanstalt have resulted in the creation or the strengthening of a duopoly or joint dominant position for K+S/MdK and the applicants . The Commission has not ( a ) K+S and MdK withdraw from Kali-Export GmbH, in proved the existence of economic links between the which they have a 50 % holding, and in which the first companies concerned which enable them to act, to any applicant has a 25 % holding; appreciable extent, independently of their competitors , customers and consumers . ( b ) K+S and/or K+S/MdK set up an independent network for the distributrion of their products within the Community and in particular in France , and Finally, the applicants consider that the Commission has distribution contracts between K+S and the first misinterpreted the scope of Regulation ( EEC ) No 4064/89 applicant are terminated; by arrogating to itself the right to apply the regulation to a joint or oligopolistic dominant position .
( c ) K+S undertakes to modify the corporate structure of Potacan by 30 June 1994 in such a way as to enable each of Potacan's shareholders , independently of the other, to market within the Community potash which it has obtained from Potacan .
The second applicant is owner of all shares in the first applicant and has a 50 % holding in Potacan. Action brought on 28 February 1994 by Hubert Remmers against the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities In its decision, the Commission identified two relevant ( Case T-89/94 ) geographical markets : the German national market and a market comprising all Member States of the Community ( 94/C 103/30 ) except Germany . It follows from the reasons given for the decision that the concentration of K+S and MdK will result in the creation between K+S/MdK and the first applicant of (Language of the case: German) a duopoly over the market which the Commission considers to be the relevant market, namely that comprising all countries of the Community except Germany . An action against the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European According to the applicants , to require that K+S/MdK Communities on 28 February 1994 by Hubert Remmers , withdraw from Kali-Export is neither necessary nor Lindern ( Federal Republic of Germany ), represented by appropriate in order to preserve effective competition . In Norbert Meyer and Heiner Meyer-Schene , Rechtsanwälte, 2 their view, the operations of Kali-Export have no impact on Lange Strasse , Oldenburg, Cloppenburg, Federal Republic conditions of competition within the common market since of Germany . sales are made exclusively to buyers outwith the Community and there is no evidence that K+S's holding in Kali-Export has impeded competition . The applicant claims that the Court of First Instance should :
The applicants additionally argue that the requirement that — order the European Community as represented by the distribution links between K+S and the first applicant be defendants to pay to the plaintiff the amount of DM terminated is neither necessary nor appropriate in order to 74 801,32 together with 8% interest thereon as from preserve effective competition . 19 May 1992 . 11 . 4 . 94 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 103/15
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support: to the vacant post or, at the very least, to recommence immediately the recruitment procedure for this post by re-issuing the same vacancy notice . In any case , the one The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as those course of action which the defendant was not entitled to in Case T-20/94 . take , after the annulment of an appointment made on the basis of a vacancy notice whose legality has never been called in question, was to issue a new vacancy notice adapted to match the person whom the appointing authority wishes to appoint .
In the applicant's view, the reasons stated in the decision to reject his complaint, in which the defendant maintains that the qualifications required in Vacancy Notice No 5809 , as Action brought on 28 February 1994 by E. Dan Frederiksen interpreted by the Court of Justice and the Court of First against the European Parliament Instance , went far beyond what was necessary for the needs ( Case T-90/94 ) of the service, are wrong. On the basis of those reasons , the ( 94/C 103/31 ) qualification requirements for candidates for the post of Language Adviser, as listed in Vacancy Notice No 7346 , were made less stringent . According to the applicant, it is (Language of the case: French) precisely the importance attached by the Community court to the data-processing qualifications for the post concerned which is called in question by that reasoning . An action against the European Parliament was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 28 February 1994 by E. Dan Frederiksen , The applicant further claims that the principle of residing in Howald ( Luxembourg ), represented by Georges non-discrimination has been breached : by omitting that Vandersanden and Laure Levi, of the Brussels Bar, with an qualification requirement from the new vacancy notice, the address for service in Luxembourg at the offices of Parliament reserved for the candidate who had already been Fiduciaire Myson, 1 rue Glesener . given a temporary appointment more favourable treatment than that accorded to the other candidates , since the new vacancy notice was simply adaped to match the former's The applicant claims that the Court of First Instance qualifications . should : Finally, the applicant submits that the defendant neglected — declare the action admissible and well founded, to follow established practice regarding vacancy notices and misused its powers . — annul Vacancy Notice No 7346 . which invites applications for the post of Language Adviser ( Grade LA 3 ) in the Danish Translation Division in particular, in so far as it no longer lists among the qualifications required 'a knowledge of the information management systems used in administrative work' and , in so far as is necessary, annul the decision of 3 December 1993 to reject the applicant's complaint . Action brought on 2 March 1994 by J. W. Esselink against the Council of the European Union and the Commission of Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support: the European Communities ( Case T-94/94 ) ( 94/C 103/32 ) The applicant, who has already brought an action resulting in a judgment of the Court of First Instance on 1 1 December 1991 ( Case T-169/89 ), which was later upheld on appeal , (Language of the case: Dutch) contests the new wording of the vacancy notice which had given rise to the action in Case T-169/89 ( above ), in that this vacancy notice no longer lists among the qualifications An action against the Council of the European Union and required 'a knowledge of the information management the Commission of the European Communities was brought systems used in administrative work'. before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 2 March 1994 by J. w . Esselink, Winterswijk, represented by H. J. Bronkhorst, Advocate The applicant claims first of all that the authority of res before the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden, and E. H. Pijnacker judicata has been disregarded , since , if the Community Hordijk, of the Amsterdam Bar , with an address for service Court's decision had been correctly implemented the in Luxembourg at the Chambers of L. Frieden, 62 avenue defendant would have been obliged to appoint the applicant Guillaume . No C 103/16 Official Journal of the European Communities 11 . 4 . 94
The applicant claims that the Court should : Articles 92 and 93 of the EC Treaty by the French State and Securipost SA . The objects of Securipost SA are principally — order the Community to pay to the applicant a specified the custody and transportation of money, valuables or amount, with annual interest of 8 % on the principal precious items of all kinds and it is a subsidiary of Sofipost, a sum from 19 May 1992 up to the date of full holding company formed in 1987 following the decision satisfaction, taken by the administration of the French Postal Services to conduct some of its business operations through — order the Community to pay to the applicant such commercial companies controlled by the State . damages as the Court may consider to be appropriate, but at least as much as the amount resulting from the application of Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 2187/93 of The applicants assert, first, that Article 93 ( 2)of the Treaty 22 July 1993 , with annual interest of 8 % on the has been infringed , in so far as the Commission failed to principal sum from 19 May 1992 up to the date of full initiate the prescribed procedure despite the fact that in the satisfaction, present case it has never denied that State aids had been applied and that these were likely to be incompatible with — order the Community to pay the costs of the the common market . proceedings . Secondly, the applicants submit that the rights of the defendant have been infringed , in that, with regard to each Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support: of the aids examined in the contested decision, the Commission refers to the explanations and evidence The pleas in law and main arguments are for the most part supplied by the French authorities , of which the applicant identical to those in Joined Cases C-104/89 and C-37/90 parties have never had sight, even though they asked the Mulder and Others v . Council and Commission [ 19921 Commission to forward them . Consequently, it has not been ECR 1 , p . 3061 . possible for the applicants to take a position .
In the applicants' opinion , the decision in question has also disregarded the requirements of Article 90 of the Treaty, particularly with regard to the financial benefits associated with the remuneration and social contributions of the Action brought on 2 March 1994 by the Chambre Syndicale administrative staff on secondment, the terms to be met for Nationale des Entreprises de Transport de Fonds et Valeurs the use of various premises , the cost of maintaining and ( Sytraval ) and Brink's France Sàrl against the Commission providing fuel for vehicles , and the loan, agreed in 1989 , of of the European Communities FF 15 000 000 from Sofipost to Securipost . ( Case T-95/94 ) ( 94/C 103/33 ) Lastly, the applicants maintain that the Commission's decision is tainted by a manifest error of judgment in that it (Language of the case: French) fails to take proper account of a number of complaints made by the applicant parties . These concern, for example , the An action against the Commission of the European increase in capital brought about by a contribution of FF Communities was brought before the Court of First 9 775 000 , the availability of loans to order and the Instance of the European Communities on 2 March 1994 by agreements made between the Post Office and Securipost, the Chambre Syndicale Nationale des Entreprises de especially regarding the charges and minimum funds Transport de Fonds et Valeurs ( Sytraval ) and Brink's France guarantee with respect to the provision of services for the Sàrl, whose registered offices are in Paris, represented by transportation of money . Jean-Michel Payre of the Paris Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Aloyse May, 1 Grand-Rue .
The applicants claim that the Court of First Instance should : Action brought on 4 March 1994 by J. P. Groot against the — annul the decision of the Commission of the European Council of the European Union and the Commission of the Communities of 31 December 1993 , together with all its European Communities legal consequences , ( Case T-96/94 ) — order the defendant to pay the costs . ( 94/C 103/34 )
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support: (Language of the case: Dutch)
The applicants contest the Commission's decision of An action against the Council of the European Union and 31 December 1993 to close its file on the complaint which the Commission of the European Communities was brought they had lodged concerning alleged infringements of before the Court of First Instance of the European 11 . 4 . 94 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 103/17
Communities on 4 March 1994 by Groot, Wijdewormer, but at least as much as the amount resulting from the represented by H. J. Bronkhorst, Advocate before the Hoge application of Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 2187/93 of Raad der Nederlanden, and E. H. Pijnacker Hordijk , of the 22 July 1993 , with annual interest of 8% on the Amsterdam Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg principal sum from 19 May 1992 up to the date of full at the Chambers of L. Frieden, 62 avenue Guillaume . satisfaction,
— order the Community to pay the costs of the The applicant claims that the Court should : proceedings .
— order the Community to pay to the applicant a specified amount, with annual interest of 8% on the principal Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support: sum from 19 May 1992 up to the date of full satisfaction, The pleas in law and main arguments are for the most part identical to those in Joined Cases C-104/89 and C-37/90 — order the Community to pay to the applicant such Mulder and Others v . Council and Commission [ 1992 ] damages as the Court may consider to be appropriate , ECR I, p . 3067.