You are on page 1of 2

C 112/26 EN Official Journal of the European Union 10.5.

2003

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 25 February 2003
of 6 March 2003
in Case T-183/00, Strabag Benelux NV v Council of the
European Union (1)
in Case T-57/00: Banan-Kompaniet AB and Skandinaviska
(Public works contracts — Contested decision non-existent
Bananimporten AB v Council of the European Union and — Statement of reasons in the decision awarding the contract
Commission of the European Communities ( 1)
— Criteria for award — Application for annulment — Non-
contractual liability of the Community)

(Bananas — Common organisation of the markets — (2003/C 112/48)


Decision 94/800/EC — Regulation (EC) No 478/95 —
Export licence scheme — Action for damages) (Language of the case: French)

(2003/C 112/47) In Case T-183/00, Strabag Benelux NV, established in Stabroek


(Belgium), represented by A. Delvaux and V. Bertrand, lawyers,
with an address for service in Luxembourg, against Council of
(Language of the case: English) the European Union (Agents: F. van Craeyenest, M. Arpio
Santacruz and J. Stuyck) — application for, first of all,
annulment of the Decision of the Council of 12 April 2000 to
award to Entreprises Louis de Waele the contract for invitation
to tender No 107865 issued on 30 July 1999 (OJ S 146) for
the refitting and general maintenance of the Council’s buildings
In Case T-57/00, Banan-Kompaniet AB, established in Stock- and, second, compensation for the damage allegedly suffered
holm (Sweden), Skandinaviska Bananimporten AB, established by the applicant as a result of the Council’s conduct — the
in Arsta (Sweden), represented by B. O’Connor, Solicitor, with Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber), composed of
an address for service in Luxembourg, v Council of the J.D. Cooke, President, and R. García-Valdecases and P. Lindh,
European Union (Agents: S. Marquardt and J.-P. Hix) and Judges; D. Christensen, Administrator, for the Registrar, has
Commission of the European Communities (Agents: initially given a judgment on 25 February 2003, in which it:
P. Oliver and C. Van der Hauwaert, then L. Visaggio and K.
Fitch): Application for compensation for the damage allegedly 1. Dismisses the application;
suffered by the applicants by reason of the introduction of the
export licence scheme by Council Decision 94/800/EC of 2. Orders the applicant to bear its own costs and those of the
22 December 1994 concerning the conclusion on behalf of Council.
the European Community, as regards matters within its
competence, of the agreements reached in the Uruguay Round (1 ) OJ C 273 of 23.9.00.
multilateral negotiations (1986-1994) (OJ 1994 L 336, p. 1)
and by Commission Regulation (EC) No 478/95 of 1 March
1995 on additional rules for the application of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 404/93 as regards the tariff quota
arrangements for imports of bananas into the Community and
amending Regulation (EEC) No 1442/93 (OJ 1995 L 49, p. 13), JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber), composed of:
J.D. Cooke, President, R. García-Valdecasas and P. Lindh, of 11 March 2003
Judges; J. Palacio González, Principal Administrator, Registrar,
has given a judgment on 6 March 2003, in which it: in Case T-186/00: Conserve Italia Soc. Coop. rl v Com-
mission of the European Communities (1)

1. Dismisses the application; (Agriculture — Guidance Section of the European Agricul-


tural Guidance and Guarantee Fund — Discontinuance of
financial aid — Article 24 of Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88
2. Orders the applicants to bear their own costs and to pay those — Principle of proportionality — Statement of reasons)
of the Council and the Commission.
(2003/C 112/49)

( 1) OJ C 135 of 13.05.2000.
(Language of the case: Italian)

In Case T-186/00: Conserve Italia Soc. Coop. rl, established in


San Lazzaro di Savena (Italy), represented by M. Averani,
10.5.2003 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 112/27

A. Pisaneschi and S. Zunarelli, lawyers, with an address for 2. Orders the Commission to pay the costs.
service in Luxembourg, against Commission of the European
Communities (Agents: initially by L. Visaggio and subsequently
by C. Cattabriga, assisted by M. Moretto) — application for (1 ) OJ C 372 of 23.12.00.
annulment of Commission Decision C (2000) 1099 of 3 May
2000 discontinuing aid from the Guidance Section of the
European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund for
Project No 9 (beneficiary: Massalombarda Colombani SpA)
in the context of operational programme No 91.CT.IT.01,
approved by Commission Decision C (91) 2255/6 of 28 Octo-
ber 1991 — the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber),
composed of R. García-Valdecasas, President, P. Lindh and
J.D. Cooke, Judges; J. Palacio González, Principal Adminis- JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
trator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 11 March
2003, in which it:
of 26 February 2003

1. Dismisses the application;


in Cases T-344/00 and T-345/00: CEVA Santé animale SA
2. Orders the applicant to bear its own costs and pay those of the and Pharmacia Entreprises SA v Commission of the
Commission. European Communities (1)

( 1) OJ C 285 of 7.10.00. (Regulation (EEC) No 2377/90 — Veterinary medicinal


products — Application for the inclusion of ‘progesterone’
in the list of substances for which it does not appear
necessary to fix a maximum residue limit — Opinion of the
Committee for Veterinary Medicinal Products (CVMP) —
Re-examination by the CVMP — Failure by the Commission
to adopt a draft of measures to be taken — Action for failure
to act — Definition of a position putting an end to a failure
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE to act — No need to adjudicate — Actions in damages —
Liability of the Community — Causal link — Interlocutory
of 27 February 2003 judgment)

in Case T-329/00, Bonn Fleisch Ex- und Import GmbH v (2003/C 112/51)
Commission of the European Communities ( 1)

(Customs duties — Imports of beef from South America — (Language of the case: English)
Article 13(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 1430/79 — Appli-
cation for recovery of import duties — Rights of the defence
— Special situation)
In Joined Cases T-344/00 and T-345/00, CEVA Santé animale
(2003/C 112/50) SA, established in Libourne (France), and Pharmacia Entreprises
SA, formerly Pharmacia & Upjohn SA, established in Luxem-
bourg, represented by D. Waelbroeck and D. Brinckman,
(Language of the case: German) lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg, supported
by Fédération européenne de la santé animale (Fedesa), estab-
lished in Brussels, represented by A. Vandencasteele, lawyer,
with an address for service in Luxembourg; Intervener: in Case
In Case T-329/00, Bonn Fleisch Ex- und Import Gmbh, T-345/00, Commission of the European Communities (Agents:
established in Troisdorf (Germany), represented by D. Ehle, T. Christoforou and M. Shotter): Application for (1) a declar-
lawyer, with an address for service in Luxembourg, against ation under Article 232 EC that, by failing to take the necessary
Commission of the European Communities (Agents: X. Lewis measures for the inclusion of progesterone in Annex II to
and Núñez-Müller) — application for annulment of the Council Regulation (EEC) No 2377/90 of 26 June 1990 laying
Commission Decision of 25 July 2000 finding that the down a Community procedure for the establishment of
recovery of import duties is not justified in a special case (REM maximum residue limits of veterinary medicinal products in
49/99) — the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber), foodstuffs of animal origin (OJ 1990 L 224, p. 1), the
composed of M. Jaeger, President and K. Lenaerts and J. Azizi, Commission has failed to comply with its obligations under
Judges; D. Christensen, Administrator, for the Registrar, has Community law and (2) damages under Article 235 EC and
given a judgment on 27 February 2003, in which it: the second paragraph of Article 288 EC, the Court of First
Instance (Second Chamber), composed of: R.M. Moura Ramos,
1. Annuls the Decision of the Commission of 25 July 2000 President, J. Pirrung and A.W.H. Meij, Judges; J. Plingers,
finding that recovery of import duties is not justified in a special Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on
case (REM 49/99); 26 February 2003, in which it has ruled: