9.3.2013

Official Journal of the European Union

C 71/12

—

(Case C-13/13 P)

2013/C 71/19

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellants: Syndicat des thoniers méditeranéens, Marc Carreno, Jean Louis Donnarel, Jean-François Flores, Gérald Jean Lubrano, Hervé Marin, Nicolas Marin, Sébastien Marin, Serge Antoine José Perez (represented by: C. Bonnefoi, lawyer)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission, Gérard Buono. Jean-Luc Buono, Roger Del Ponte, Serge Antoine Di Rocco, Jean Gérald Lubrano, Jean Lubrano, Jean Lucien Lubrano, Fabrice Marin, Robert Marin

Form of order sought

—Uphold the claims and pleas in law of the appellants in their appeal;

—Set aside the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 7 November 2012 in Case T-574/08 in so far as it rejects the appellants’ application;

—Set aside the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 7 November 2012 in Case T-574/08 on the issue of costs;

—Declare admissible and allow the application by the Syndicat des Thoniers de la Méditerranée (STM), including the application for damages;

—Uphold the applications by the applicants before the General Court who have appealed to the Court of Justice;

—Uphold the applications by the applicants before the General Court with regard to the principle of compensatory damages;

—Uphold the applications of the applicants before the General Court with regard to the amount of compensation applied for in the initial application as subsequently corrected in accordance with the establishment of the elements of the loss of use calculation and the evidence;

—Should the previous point be rejected, appoint an expert under the responsibility of the European Commission to calculate the compensation due on the basis of a calculation method to be adopted by the Court;

—Order the Commission to pay all the costs and to reimburse all the charges relating to lawyers’ costs, legal proceedings, transport and travel incurred by the STM and the individual appellants.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The appellants rely on four pleas in law in support of their appeal.

First, the Syndicat des thoniers méditerranéens considers that the General Court distorted the facts contained in the case-file in order to deny it any interest in bringing an action and, consequently, in order to hold that its action was inadmissible.

Second, the appellants consider that the General Court erred in law by interpreting the judgment of 17 March 2011 in Case C-221/09 AJD Tuna in such a way as to make it possible to regard Regulation (EC) No 530/2008 as an unlawful act. According to the appellants, that Regulation remains lawful, but is partially invalid.

Third, the appellants complain that the General Court failed to acknowledge the Commission's liability for a lawful act, on the basis that the harm relied on would not exceed the limits of the economic risk inherent in fishing.

Finally, the appellants complain that the General Court ruled in disregard of rules of law with which it was bound to comply by not ruling on the pleas in law or arguments brought before it by the parties to the dispute. In particular, the appellants complain that the General Court did not rule on the pleas in law or arguments concerning the different treatment of the Spanish seiners and the appellants under Regulation (EC) No 530/2008.

—

Commission Regulation (EC) No 530/2008 of 12 June 2008 establishing emergency measures as regards purse seiners fishing for bluefin tuna in the Atlantic Ocean, east of longitude 45 °W, and in the Mediterranean Sea (OJ 2008 L 155, p. 9).

—