Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 2

21.10.

2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 302/31

For the Bureau of the European Parliament now to apply The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as those
in respect of the applicant the ‘Rules’ of 16 December put forward by Biret International in Case T-174/00.
1998 is tantamount to an attempt to alter twelve years
after their implementation the rules and conditions
applicable to the competition on the basis of which the
applicant was recruited to carry out (specifically) the
duties of Head of the Information Service in Lisbon. By
doing so, the principle of the non-retroactivity of laws
has been breached.
Action brought on 11 August 2000 by Nuove Industrie
Molisane s.r.l. against the Commission of the European
— Breaches the principle of legality
Communities
Adoption of rules with the scope of the ‘Rules on the
implementation of the mobility policy’ amounts to a (Case T-212/00)
veritable amendment of the Staff Regulations which
exceeds the powers of the Parliament to define and (2000/C 302/73)
implement its staff policy under the provisions of the
Staff Regulations.
(Language of the Case: Italian)

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-


ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 11 August 2000 by Nuove Indus-
trie Molisane s.r.l., represented by Ivo Van Bael, of the Brussels
Bar, and Fabrizio Di Gianni, of the Rome Bar.
Action brought on 10 August 2000 by Etablissements
Biret et Cie against the Council of the European Union The applicant company claims that the Court should:

(Case T-210/00) — Annul the contested decision in so far as the Commission


applied the adjustment factor of 0,75 to the competition
assessment criterion, instead of the proposed factor of 1;
(2000/C 302/72)
— Order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings;

(Language of the case: French) — Adopt any other such measure as may appear appropriate
on legal and equitable grounds.
An action against the Council of the European Union was
brought before the Court of First Instance of the European
Pleas in law and main arguments
Communities on 10 August 2000 by Etablissements Biret et
Cie, established in Paris, represented by Stéphane Rodrigues,
of the Paris Bar. The applicant in the present case, which is a limited-liability
company consisting of a single person, established in Sesto
Campano, which is an assisted area for the purposes of
The applicant claims that the Court should: Article 87(3)(c) EC, challenges Commission Decision
SG(2000)D/103923 of 30 May 2000 (State Aid No N 787/99)
— establish the liability of the European Community in the concerning a project for regional investment aid in favour of
court-supervised liquidation of the applicant’s subsidiary, the applicant, as defined in the Commission notice on the
the company known as Biret International; multisectoral framework on regional aid for large investment
projects.
— order the Council of the European Union to pay to the
applicant damages in the sum of FRF 70 630 850;
The object of the subsidised project is to establish a plant for
the production of clinker (the basic material used in the
— order the Council of the European Union to pay all the manufacture of water-activated binders), which the applicant
costs. is at present lacking.

The aid in question has been declared partially compatible


Pleas in law and main arguments
with the common market. The applicant submits in this regard
that the Commission’s decision to use, in the formula for
The applicant claims compensation for the loss and damage determining the maximum allowable aid intensity, the figure
arising from the court-supervised liquidation of its subsidiary, of 0,75 as the adjustment factor for the competition assess-
Biret International, which has been forced to cease trading as ment criterion, and consequently to declare compatible only
a result of the prohibition of imports into the Community of the amount of ITL 29 176,69 million, is vitiated on the
beef and veal, especially of American origin. following grounds:
C 302/32 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 21.10.2000

— Error in the reasoning; Action brought on 23 August 2000 by Cooperativa Mare


Azzurro scrl and Others against Commission of the
— The Commission unlawfully concluded that, notwith- European Communities
standing a marked upward trend, the market in question
is in decline;
(Case T-218/00)
— The decision is vitiated in so far as it uses a mean annual
rate for the entire manufacturing industry equivalent
to 5,78%; (2000/C 302/75)

— The Commission failed to notify the applicant of the


principal facts underlying its decision in regard to the use
of the coefficient of 0,75. (Language of the case: Italian)

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-


ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 23 August 2000 by Cooperativa
Mare Azzurro scrl and Others, represented by Giuseppe
Boscolo, of the Venice Bar.

Action brought on 21 August 2000 by Antena 3 de


Televisión, S.A. against the Commission of the European The applicants claim that the Court should:
Communities

— annul wholly or, in the alternative, in part the contested


(Case T-216/00) decision and/or in any event declare the contested
decision to be of no effect in respect of the applicants
(2000/C 302/74) and furthermore order the defendant to pay the costs.

(Language of the case: Spanish)


Pleas in law and main arguments

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-


ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the The applicants in the present case, cooperatives which provide
European Communities on 21 August 2000 by Antena 3 de services to several hundred small fishing undertakings
Televisión, established in Madrid, represented by Fernando operating from Venice and Chioggia, challenge the contested
Pombo Garcı́a, Emiliano Garayar Gutiérrez and Rosario Alonso decision of 25 November 1999 on aid to firms in Venice and
Pérez-Villanueva, lawyers. Chioggia by way of relief from social security contributions
under Laws Nos 30/1997 and 206/1995 (1).
The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul Commission Decision 2000/400/EC of 10 May That decision declares certain aid received by those undertak-
2000 (‘Eurovision’); and ings to be incompatible with the common market.

— order the Commission to pay all the costs incurred by


Antena 3 de Televisión, S.A. in the present proceedings. In support of their application, the applicants claim that:

— The Commission did not find that the aid in question


Pleas in law and main arguments constitutes an arrangement for a three-year period and
is thus not recoverable under Article 15 of Council
The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as those Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying
put forward in Case T-185/00 Métropole Télévision M 6 (1). down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of
the EC Treaty (2).

(1) Not yet published.


— The contested decision fails to take into account the
situation concerning rents and occupancy in Chioggia’s
old town, inasmuch as it does not apply the derogation
provided for in Article 87(3)(a) of the Treaty.