BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £5, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | ||
Court of Justice of the European Communities (including Court of First Instance Decisions) |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Court of Justice of the European Communities (including Court of First Instance Decisions) >> CCRE v Commission (Regional policy) [2000] EUECJ T-151/98 (03 February 2000) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/EUECJ/2000/T15198.html Cite as: [2000] EUECJ T-151/98 |
[New search] [Help]
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE (Fourth Chamber)
3 February 2000 (1)
(Action for annulment - European Regional Development Fund - Reduction of financial assistance - Failure to state reasons - Legitimate expectations - Legal certainty)
In Joined Cases T-46/98 and T-151/98,
Council of European Municipalities and Regions (CEMR), an association governed by French law, established in Paris, represented by Daniel M. Tomasevic and Francis Herbert, of the Brussels Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Katia Manhaeve, 56-58 Rue Charles Martel,
applicant,
v
Commission of the European Communities, represented by Peter Oliver, of its Legal Service, acting as Agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Carlos Gómez de la Cruz, of its Legal Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg,
defendant,
APPLICATION for the annulment of the Commission's decision reducing the financial assistance granted to the applicant by the European Regional Development Fund for the European City Cooperation System Programme,
THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (Fourth Chamber),
composed of: R.M. Moura Ramos, President, V. Tiili and P. Mengozzi, Judges,
Registrar: A. Mair, Administrator,
having regard to the written procedure and further to the hearing on 17 June 1999,
gives the following
Background and procedure
'The following non-documented expenditure cannot be accepted for cofinancing:
- CEMR's estimates as to possible non-documented expenditure that mayors and municipal officials might have incurred in order to take part in events of interest for cooperation;
- any expenditure that municipalities and regions might have incurred in various promotional events; and
- any contributions in kind that local bodies might have incurred in respect of financial, legal and technical expertise.
Those estimates by CEMR concerned possible expenditure, unsupported by any evidence, that might have been incurred de facto. There is no proof of payment and in any event this expenditure was not borne by CEMR. Moreover, the amounts submitted are not exact, since they are mere estimates of possible costs which cannot be accepted as expenditure to be cofinanced by the ERDF.'
Forms of order sought
Case T-46/98
- annul the decision contained in the debit note of December 1997, as amended by the decision contained in the debit note of 15 July 1998;
- order the Commission to pay the costs.
dismiss the application as unfounded (except as regards the amount of ECU 63 163, which has been the subject of a rectification);
- order the applicant to pay the costs.
Case T-151/98
- annul the decision contained in the debit note of 15 July 1998;
- order the Commission to pay all the costs, whatever the outcome of the proceedings.
- dismiss the application as unfounded;
- order the applicant to pay the costs.
Subject-matter of the actions in Cases T-46/98 and T-151/98
Arguments of the parties
Findings of the Court
Substance
|
|
Strasbourg General Assembly
- Heading A: Launch and promotional conferences - Heading C2: Examination of files/Promotions - Heading E: Participation in training events
Total deducted for the CEMR General Assembly |
|
C1 - Permanent secretariat, Strasbourg (overheads) |
|
C2 - Examination of files/Promotions (expenditure on equipment) |
|
D - Coordination of cooperation projects (travel expenses/meetings) |
|
E - Decentralised management of cooperation (financial, legal and technical expertise) |
|
E - Decentralised management of cooperation (coordinators at 12 Community points) |
|
Total |
|
|
Cofinancing anticipated by the applicant (in ECU) |
|
East-West Cooperation Days
|
|
|
Principal plea in law: breach of the obligation to state reasons
Arguments of the parties
Findings of the Court
- letter from the Commission dated 30 July 1997 in which it informed the applicant that, having made an inspection visit, the Commission could not accept certain undocumented expenditure for cofinancing;
- meeting of 24 September 1997 at which, as the applicant's letter of 2 October 1997 makes clear, the Commission identified the expenditure which it considered ineligible and set out the faults it had found;
- letter from the Director of DG XVI dated 1 October 1997 setting out, in respect of the first and second grants, heading by heading, ineligible expenditure;
- letter from the Director-General of DG XVI dated 24 October 1997 containing an incomplete and not very detailed table in which the Commission confines itself to setting out the sums still owed by CEMR for each submission under the title 'Projects';
- letter dated 15 June 1998 confirming the refusal to accept the supporting documents submitted by the applicant.
Alternative plea: breach of the principles of protection of legitimate expectations and legal certainty
Arguments of the parties
Findings of the Court
(a) ECU 200 000 under the heading 'Projects', which the Commission considered eligible for cofinancing to a maximum of ECU 100 000 pursuant to the commitment it had made in its letters of 23 June and 7 October 1993;
(b) the remaining expenditure was declared under the heading 'Coordination and promotions' (management):
- ECU 101 598 under Heading A 'Launch and promotional conferences' for the participation of local elected representatives to Workshop 2 on East-West interregional cooperation and the ECOS Programme;
- ECU 53 300 under Heading C2 'Examination of files/Promotions' (subheading 'Information events/Publications') for the setting up of an information stand intended to provide information to local elected representatives;
- ECU 256 882 under Heading E 'Decentralised management of cooperation' (subheading 'Participation in promotions') for the financing of participants' travel expenses to the CEMR's General Assembly.
Costs
In Case T-46/98
In Case T-151/98
91. Since the bringing of this action was justified by the Commission's conduct, the Commission should be ordered to bear its own costs and, in addition, to pay the costs incurred by the applicant.
On those grounds,
THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE (Fourth Chamber)
hereby:
1. Annuls the Commission decision contained in Debit Note No 97009405 F relating to the European City Cooperation System Project No 91/00/29/003, issued in December 1997 and amended on 15 July 1998, in so far as it concerns the refusal of cofinancing in respect of expenditure declared by the Commission to be ineligible, with the exception of expenditure connected with the Strasbourg General Assembly in the amounts of ECU 101 598 and ECU 256 882;
2. Dismisses the remainder of the application in Case T-46/98;
3. Rules that there is no need to adjudicate in Case T-151/98;
4. Orders the Commission to bear all the costs.
Moura Ramos
|
Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 3 February 2000.
H. Jung V. Tiili
Registrar President
1: Language of the case: French.