28.3.
98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities
brought before the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities on 8 December 1997 by J. Ward, B. Ward
and Mrs M. Lewis, represented by Rory Hutchings,
Solicitor, of Messrs Dawson & Co., of 2 New Square,
Lincoln's Inn, London WC2A 3RZ.
The applicant claims that the Court should:
Ð order the Council and/or the Commission for damages
in accordance with Schedule 1 attached hereto,
Ð order the Council and/or the Commission to pay the
applicant's costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
The applicant challenges the damaging consequences of
the fact that, unlike the position with respect to SLOM I
and II, he, as a SLOM II milk producer, has not been
compensated for the absence of quota prior to the
introduction of SLOM quota.
The grounds and main arguments are the same as those
raised in case T-304/97 Hilsdon v. Council and
Commission.
Action brought on 10 December 1997 by Pescados
Congelados Jogamar SL against the Commission of the
European Communities
(Case T-311/97)
(98/C 94/70)
(Language of the case: Spanish)
An action against the Commission of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First
Instance of the European Communities on 10 December
1997 by Pescados Congelados Jogamar SL, whose
registered office is at Las Palmas de Gran Canaria (Spain),
represented by Manuel de Cristóbal López, of the Madrid
Bar, with an address for service at 15 Calle Prim, Madrid.
The applicant claims that the Court should:
Ð uphold this action for declaration of failure to act;
declare that the European Commission's failure to
take action with regard to the seizure of the Albor
Uno constitutes a breach of the EEC Treaty (Article 38
et seq.) and of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3954/92
of 19 December 1992 on the conclusion of the
Agreement on relations in the sea fisheries sector
between the European Economic Community and the
Kingdom of Morocco and laying down provisions for
its implementation; declare that the European
Commission should take action itself rather than
delegate power to the national authorities in the
fisheries sector; and make an express order requiring
the European Commission to pay the costs incurred.
C 94/27
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
The applicant, the company which owns the vessel Albor
Uno, alleges that the defendant failed to use its exclusive
powers in the fisheries sector when the aforementioned
vessel was seized, and subsequently arrested, on 16 July
1997 by a Moroccan patrol vessel on the ground that it
was fishing 4,5 nautical miles off the Moroccan coast. The
applicant denies this and asserts that the vessel was
13 miles offshore when it was seized. Moreover, the
limited measures which the Commission took merely
consisted of visiting the vessel, drawing up an expert
report and replying to a fax from the applicant. Although
it is true that the Commission called a meeting of the EU-
Morocco Joint Committee, whose task it is to ensure the
observance of fishing agreements, Morocco refused
systematically to attend that meeting. The relase of the
vessel was achieved after difficult negotiations undertaken
directly and at personal level between the shipowner and
the relevant Moroccan authorities with no official
participation at any time, either on the part of the Spanish
or Community authorities.
In the applicant's view, the defendant's failure to act was
detrimental to the right to a fair hearing of a Community
undertaking and vessel and deprived them of protection
since the only way of establishing the facts was by
communicating with the Moroccan authorities, which was
not done, and monitoring the situation by the Community
was the only safeguard, which, by being delegated to the
Spanish authorities, was in fact denied. Moreover, the fact
that Morocco does not regard the GPS system as a means
of establishing a vessel's position and accepts only its
naval radar reports is seriously detrimental to the rights of
the defence of fishing vessels equipped with that system.
Finally, if it is indeed the Community which is competent
by virtue of the fishing agreements, it falls to it to
denounce the total and complete ineffectiveness of an
agreement which deprives European Union citizens and
vessels of any protection, and to take measures to prevent
it or, on the contrary, to emend Community law.
Action brought on 29 December 1997 by Cordis Obst und
Gemüse Grosshandel GmbH against the Commission of
the European Communities
(Case T-612/97)
(98/C 94/71)
(Language of the case: German)
An action against the Commission of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First