Notice for the OJ

 

    

Action brought on 17 December 2001 by Norway Seafoods Denmark A/S against the Commission of the European Communities

    (Case T-319/01)

    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 17 December 2001 by Norway Seafoods Denmark A/S, represented by Mr Jacob Ørndrup of Gorrissen Federspiel Kierkegaard, Copenhagen (Denmark).

The applicant claims that the Court should:

listnum "WP List 1" \l 1annul Commission Decision K(2001)3079 of 16 October 2001

listnum "WP List 1" \l 1order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

The present application has been lodged against Commission Decision K(2001)3079 of 16 October 2001, regarding the reduction and repayment of financial aid to Foodmark A/S under Commission Decision K(93)1823 of 5 July 1993, as amended by Decision K(94)119 of 27 January 1994, for Project SM/DNK/02/93, the object of which was an application for financial aid pursuant to Council Regulation (EEC) No. 4028/88 of 18 December 1986, on Community measures to improve and adapt structures in the fisheries and aquaculture sector as amended by Council Regulation (EEC) No. 3944/90 of 20 December 1990¹. The applicant's name at the time of this application was Foodmark A/S; this name was later changed to Foodmark Holding A/S and later still to Norway Seafoods Denmark A/S.

It was stated in the application that the Community Shipowners should hold 60% of the shares of the joint enterprise, while the partner in the relevant third Country, Namibia, should hold 40% of the shares. After the withdrawal of the project of the Spanish company E. Vieira S.A. and the replacement of two of the four vessels involved with two other vessels, the applicant and the Namibian partner concluded an agreement, according to which the applicant owned 28,51% of the share capital, but only 13,68% of the voting rights. Finally, with effect from 1 May 1995, the applicant transferred part of its shareholding in the joint entreprise to the Namibian partner under an agreement providing that the applicant's shareholding was reduced to 1% of the share capital. According to the contested Decision, the basis for providing financial aid has ceased to exist because of this reduction to 1% of the applicant's shareholding in the joint undertaking, which is not be considered sufficient for a joint enterprise, as defined by Community Regulations.

The contested Decision infringes Article 44(1) of the above mentioned Council Regulation (EEC) No. 4028/86.

- The reduction of the applicant's shareholding in the joint enterprise to 1% did not mean that a joint enterprise within the meaning of the Regulation no longer existed.

- The applicant had a legitimate expectation that the reduction of the Applicant's shareholding in the joint enterprise to 1% would not result in any demand for repayment of aid from the Commission.

____________

¹ - OJEC L 219, of 7.8.91, p. 39.