Notice for the OJ

 

Action brought on 24 April 2003 by "U" and Others against the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities

    (Case T-138/03)

    (Language of the case: French)

An action against the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 24 April 2003 by "U" and Others, represented by François Honnorat, lawyer.

The applicants claim that the Court should:

(order compensation for the non-material or material damage suffered by them as a consequence of the infection of their close relatives with BSE;

(order the defendants to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicants all live in France and are victims, either indirectly or as persons entitled under or through persons who have died in France, of a "variant" form of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. By this action, the applicants are lodging a claim for damages to compensate for the material or non-material damage allegedly suffered as a consequence of the death of persons infected with BSE.

The applicants submit that the defendants made a manifest error of assessment, misused their powers and violated the legitimate expectations of European consumers.

The applicants maintain that the defendants made a manifest error of assessment in their management of the risks associated with the BSE epidemic by not recommending a forward scientific evaluation of the risk of BSE developing BSE in the various geographical areas of the Union at the time of identification of the causes of the epidemic and of adoption of the first protective measures in the United Kingdom. That manifest error of assessment is also evidenced by the failure of the defendants to call for a retrospective study to shed light on the cause of the infections subsequently recorded in France.

In support of their claims, the applicants submit that the defendants' conduct in this case constitutes a misuse of powers inasmuch as it was aimed only at protecting in an ill-considered manner the interests of the market and of the beef sector. According to the applicants, the defendants' action consisted in dissuading the Member States from adopting unilateral protective measures.     

The applicants further maintain that the defendants' internal disorganisation led their staff to underestimate the risks of BSE developing and by that very fact constitutes a serious breach of the legitimate expectations of European consumers.

The applicants draw attention to the abnormal and special nature of the damage suffered by them as a result of the non-natural cause of BSE and of the inapplicability of the European system of producers' liability for defective products to the case in point.

____________