Notice for the OJ

 

Action brought on 30 January 2003 by The General Workers Union in Denmark (Specialarbejderforbundet i Danmark "SID") against the Commission of the European Communities.

    (Case T-30/03)

    Language of the case: English

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 30 January 2003 by The General Workers Union in Denmark (Specialarbejderforbundet i Danmark "SID"), Copenhagen, Denmark, represented by Philip Bentley QC, Mr Anders Worsøe and Mr Filip Ragolle, Lawyers.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

listnum "WP List 1" \l 1annul Commission decision C(2002)4370fin of 13 November 2002 in so far as it is decided not to raise any objections to fiscal measures that have been applied since 1 January 1989 to seafarers on board vessels registered in Denmark, either in the DAS or in the DIS registers;

listnum "WP List 1" \l 1order that the costs of the proceedings be borne by the Commission

Pleas in law and main arguments:

The applicant, the General Workers Union in Denmark, lodged a complaint with the Commission regarding the tax regime applied to seafarers employed on board ships registered in the Danish International Shipping register (DIS). In the contested decision, the Commission decided not to raise objections to the fiscal measures and considered that they constituted state aid, but that they were and still are compatible with the common market on the basis of Article 87 (3)(c) EC Treaty.

The fiscal measures in question grant tax exemptions to all seafarers employed on -board ships registered in the DIS register. The Commission considered that this was in conformity with the Community guidelines on state aid to maritime transport¹ according to which reduced rates of income tax for EC seafarers on board ships registered in a Member State are compatible with the common market.

In support of its application, the applicant invokes an infringement of essential procedural requirements and the principle of good administration. The applicant alleges that the case involved serious difficulties and that the Commission therefore should have opened an investigation pursuant to Article 88(2) EC Treaty.

The applicant furthermore submits a violation of Article 87(3)(c) EC Treaty in conjunction with the Community guidelines on state aid to maritime shipping and the principle of legitimate expectations. According to the applicant, the Commission erred by interpreting the notion of "EC seafarers" as meaning any seafarer employed on board a vessel registered in a Member State.

The applicant finally invokes a manifest error of assessment. The applicant alleges that the Commission should have made an assessment of the effect of the tax exemptions have on the employment of seafarers residing in a Member State and employed on terms and conditions which meet the high standards prevailing in the Community.

____________

¹ - Community guidelines on State aid to maritime transport (OJ C 205 of 1997, p.5)