Notice for the OJ

 

Action brought on 23 April 2004 by Ferriere Nord SpA against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-153/04)

Language of the case: Italian

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 23 April 2004 by Ferriere Nord SpA, represented by Wilma Viscardini and Gabriele Donà.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

- Annul, pursuant to Article 230 EC, the decisions of the Commission of the European Communities contained in the registered letter BUDG/C-5/DS (D2004) / 51138 of 5 February 2004, received by the applicant on 13 February 2004, and the fax BUDG/C-05/DS (D2004) 53883, received by the applicant on 13 April 2004, by which Ferriere Nord was requested to pay the sums of EUR 564 402.26 and EUR 341 932.32 respectively in relation to the proceeding IV/31.553 - Welded steel mesh;

- Order the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

In support of its complaints, the applicant submits that the decisions referred to above, which enforce the Commission decision of 2 August 1989 (in which the applicant was ordered to pay a fine of ECU 320 000 for infringement of Article 85(1) of the EEC Treaty) are unlawful because they were adopted after expiry of the limitation period laid down in Article 4 of Regulation No 2988/74 of the Council concerning limitation periods in proceedings and enforcement of sanctions under the rules of the European Economic Community relating to transport and competition¹. In particular:

the Commission decision of 2 August 1989 became final with the judgment of the Court of Justice of 17 July 1997 and so, on that date, the limitation period of five years laid down by Article 4 of Regulation No 2988/74 began to run;

that period was interrupted by the Commission's letter of 11 September 1997, notified to the applicant on 18 September 1997, with the result that a new limitation period of five years started to run (pursuant to Article 5 of Regulation No 2988/74);

the Commission therefore should have enforced the decision imposing the fine by 11 September 2002 or, at the latest, by 18 September 2002;

the contested decisions by contrast are those of 5 February 2004 (received by the applicant on 13 February 2004) and 13 April 2004 (received by the applicant by fax on 13 April 2004);

the Commission's power to bring legal proceedings to enforce its decision of 2 August 1989 is therefore time-barred.

____________

¹ - OJ L 319 of 29.11.1974, p. 1.