Action brought on 26 May 2009 - Formenti Seleco v Commission

(Case T-210/09)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Formenti Seleco SpA (Pordenone, Italy) (represented by: A. Malatesta, G. Terracciano and S. Malatesta, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

Order the Commission of the European Communities to pay compensation totalling EUR 156 2008 915,03 to Formenti Seleco SpA, which is in liquidation under special administration, together with statutory interest with effect from the date of declaration of insolvency or, in the alternative, to the extent which the Court may consider equitable;

order the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant company, one of the main manufacturers in Italy of colour televisions, was declared insolvent and placed under special administration following the wide-scale importation into the European market of colour televisions manufactured by Turkish companies which were sold at prices that amounted to dumping.

That situation arose within the Community as a direct result of the infringement by the Turkish Republic of the Association Agreement concluded with the EC in 1963 and subsequent supplementary measures, in so far as the Turkish Government established a legal framework designed to avoid its obligations under the Association Agreement with the Community with regard, in particular, to the determination of the Turkish origin of colour televisions imported into the Community, the Commission having been aware since at least 1993 of such circumventions.

In particular, Formenti Seleco SpA maintains that the Commission is liable on the following grounds, which are capable of establishing its non-contractual liability to it and its consequent obligation to pay compensation for damage:

infringement of its obligations under the Association Agreement and the Additional Protocol thererto, in so far as, either during the transitional period for the implementation of the customs union between the Community and the Turkish Republic or until 1994, or, in particular, at the time when full customs union was accomplished, it failed to ensure that the relevant customs legislation was correctly applied, even though it was aware that the Turkish Republic was disregarding the agreements.

Infringement of Article 211 EC and the principle of sound administration, since, in so far as the Association Agreement and the Additional Protocol form part of Community law, the Commission is also obliged to monitor the implementation of those provisions and to ensure sound administration.

Infringement of the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations, since, as a result of the conduct referred to above, it frustrated the expectation of individual Community commercial operators, and in particular that of the applicant, that the customs union with Turkey would function properly, an expectation that should have been met by means of the checks and controls which the Commission failed to carry out.

Infringement and/or misapplication of the rules on anti-dumping, since the Commission, even though it had been aware since 1993 of the serious irregularities committed by Turkish exporters, failed to adopt protective measures against such exporters and acted without the diligence and prudence normally to be expected of an administration.

____________