Action brought on 5 September 2008 - Abouchar v Commission

(Case T-367/08)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Michel Abouchar (Dakar, Senegal) (represented by: B. Dubreuil Basire and J-J. Lorang, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

Declare that officials of the Commission/EDF committed intentional torts in the performance of their tasks;

declare that the Commission/EDF infringed Article 155 EC and Article 311 of the Fourth Lomé Convention and the general principles of sound administration, duty of care and the protection of legitimate interests;

declare that those torts directly gave rise to harm to the applicant and order the Commission/EDF to pay him jointly and severally, for all the damage he suffered, the sum of EUR 4 500 000 by way of damages and interest;

order the Commission/EDF to pay the applicant the sum of EUR 100 000 as irrecoverable expenditure which the applicant had to incur;

order the Commission to pay the entire costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

By means of his action for non-contractual liability, the applicant is seeking to obtain a declaration that the Commission infringed the financial implementing rules of the Sixth and Seventh European Development Fund ('the EDF') and of the so-called 'Lomé III' and 'Lomé IV' ¹ Conventions linking the Community with the African, Caribbean and Pacific States ('ACP'), in the context of managing resources of the EDF concerning a project to finance Small and Medium Enterprises in the region of Saint-Louis of Senegal.

In this case, the applicant, the beneficiary of a loan for a vegetable farm project in the eligible region, takes the view that management errors and misappropriation of funds allegedly imputed to Commission officials had the effect of immediately paralysing his farming project set up under the European Development Fund.

The applicant essentially relies on two Commission failures, capable of giving rise to non-contractual liability on the part of the Commission. More precisely, the applicant alleges, first, errors committed by officials when carrying out their duties, and, secondly, a failure to monitor funding awarded by the Commission, breach of Articles 155 EC and Article 311 of the Fourth Lomé Convention, and of the general principles of sound administration, duty of care and protection of legitimate expectations.

____________

¹ - Since 23 June 2000, the Lomé Convention has been replaced by the Cotonou Agreement (OJ 2000 L 317, p. 3). The applicant still refers in his application, however, to the Lomé III and IV Conventions.