I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
(Case T-43/08)
(2008/C 92/72)
Language of the case: English
Applicant: Shetland Islands Council (represented by: E. Whiteford, Barrister, R. Murray, Solicitor and R. Thompson QC)
Defendant: Commission of the European Communities
—Annulment of Articles 3, 4 and 5 of the decision; and
—the costs of this application.
The applicant is a public authority that made payments to the fisheries sector under the scope of two general aid measures, named ‘Aid to Fish Catching and Processing Industry’ and ‘Aid to the Fish Farming Industry’ consisting of different types of aid schemes. The Commission found that the aid which the United Kingdom implemented on the basis of the ‘Fish Factory Improvement Scheme’ was incompatible with the common market, in so far as it concerned the amount of GBP 92 007, granted on 13 August 1997, 7 January 1999, 25 February 1999, 10 December 1999, 19 January 2001 and 15 December 2004.
By means of its application, the applicant seeks partial annulment pursuant to Article 230 EC of Commission Decision C 38/2006 (ex NN 93/2005) of 13 November 2007 concerning the ‘Fish Factory Improvement Scheme’ implemented in the United Kingdom. In particular, the applicant seeks annulment of Articles 3, 4 and 5 of the contested decision on the ground that the Commission erred in finding that recovery of payments would be compatible with:
(1)Article 14(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 (1); and
(2)the general principles of legal certainty and the protection of legitimate expectations and of equality of treatment.
Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty (OJ L 83, p. 1).