You are on page 1of 1

C 211/46 EN Official Journal of the European Union 8.9.

2007

the Commission, exceeded the level of normal stocks of those Action brought on 13 July 2007 — Campo de Cartagena v
products and imposed on Poland for that reason ‘the amounts Council and Commission
to be charged … in consequence of the expense of elimination
of those quantities [of surplus stocks]’. (Case T-244/07)

(2007/C 211/85)
The applicant requests that the decision be declared invalid and
bases its charge on two pleas in law: the plea that the Commis- Language of the proceedings: Spanish
sion was not competent to adopt the contested decision and
that it breached Point 4 of Section 4 of Annex IV to the Act of
Accession (2); and the plea that the Commission infringed the
principle of proportionality. Parties

Applicant: S.A.T., ‘Campo de Cartagena’ (Murcia, Spain) (repre-


sented by: L. Ortiz Blanco, lawyer)
As the basis for its first plea in law, the applicant submits that,
in adopting the contested decision, the Commission exceeded
the competence deriving from Point 4 of Section 4 of Annex IV Defendant: Council of the European Union and Commission of
to the Act of Accession inasmuch as that decision alters the the European Communities
agreements entered into in the Act of Accession by reason of
the introduction of financial sanctions not provided for in that
Act. The applicant further submits that the contested decision is Forms of order sought
at variance with the principle defined in the Act of Accession
which provides that the Member States must effect the actual
elimination of surplus stocks of agricultural products in free — to uphold the present action for damages, in accordance
circulation within their territory at the time of accession. with Article 228 EC, and declare the applicant is entitled to
be financially compensated by the Council and the Commis-
sion jointly and severally in the sum total of two hundred
and eighty-eight thousand two hundred and thirty-eight
euros (EUR 288 238);
As the basis for its plea in law concerning infringement of the
principle of proportionality, the applicant submits that the — to order the defendant institutions to pay the costs.
objectives of the contested decision are mutually incompatible
and for that reason have no legal justification. Moreover, in the
applicant's view, the contested decision is not an appropriate
means by which to calculate the costs of eliminating surplus Pleas in law and main arguments
supplies. The applicant submits at the same time that the
contested decision is critically flawed in its determination of the The pleas in law and main arguments are those already put
quantities of surplus stocks in free circulation within Polish forward in the Case T-217/07 Las Palmeras v Council and
territory and that it failed to take account of the quantities of Commission.
stocks which Poland eliminated at its own expense following the
date of accession. The applicant contends that the decision
imposed on Poland the costs of eliminating stocks which in
actual fact were not borne by the Community, and that this
resulted in unjust enrichment of the Community to the detri-
ment of Poland. The applicant also submits that the adoption of
the contested decision was not a necessary act in view of the
lack of disturbances on the agricultural markets following Polish Action brought on 13 July 2007 — Virsa v Council and
accession to the European Union and in view of the lengthy Commission
period of time which has elapsed since the date of accession.
According to the applicant's assertions, the contested decision, (Case T-245/07)
notwithstanding the fact that it was adopted on the basis of the
Act of Accession, does not realise any of the objectives defined
in that Act within the agricultural sector. (2007/C 211/86)

Language of the proceedings: Spanish


(1) OJ 2007 L 138, p. 14.
(2) Act concerning the conditions of accession of the Czech Republic,
the Republic of Estonia, the Republic of Cyprus, the Republic of
Latvia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Republic of Hungary, the
Republic of Malta, the Republic of Poland, the Republic of Slovenia Parties
and the Slovak Republic and the adjustments to the Treaties on
which the European Union is founded (OJ 2003 L 236, p. 33).
Applicant: Virsa, S. Coop. L. (Murcia, Spain) (represented by:
L. Ortiz Blanco, lawyer)

Defendants: Council of the European Union and Commission of


the European Communities