This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document C2007/283/66
Case T-372/07: Action brought on 24 September 2007 — Dimos Kerateas (Municipality of Keratea) v Commission of the European Communities
Case T-372/07: Action brought on 24 September 2007 — Dimos Kerateas (Municipality of Keratea) v Commission of the European Communities
Case T-372/07: Action brought on 24 September 2007 — Dimos Kerateas (Municipality of Keratea) v Commission of the European Communities
OJ C 283, 24.11.2007, p. 36–37
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
24.11.2007 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 283/36 |
Action brought on 24 September 2007 — Dimos Kerateas (Municipality of Keratea) v Commission of the European Communities
(Case T-372/07)
(2007/C 283/66)
Language of the case: Greek
Parties
Applicant: Municipality of Keratea (Attiki, Greece) (represented by: A. Papakonstantinou and M. Khaidarlis)
Defendant: Commission of the European Communities
Form of order sought
The Court is asked to:
|
— |
annul Commission Decision E(2004) 5611 of 22 December 2004 concerning the grant of assistance from the Cohesion Fund for the ‘Solid Waste Management Project of the First Attiki District Management Unit in South East Attiki and the Second District Management Unit in Trizinia, 1. Hygienic Landfill Site in the integrated waste management facility at “Vragoni”, Keratea-Lavreotiki, in South East Attiki, 2. Waste transport depot of the Second Attiki District Management Unit in Trizinia’; |
|
— |
in the event of doubt, order an on-the-spot inspection in the project area and to seek independent technical opinions to corroborate the applicant's arguments; |
|
— |
order the Commission to pay the costs. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
As regards its locus standi on the basis of Article 230 EC, the applicant considers that the contested decision, concerning the creation of a Hygienic Landfill Site on an area which is not within the district of the Municipality of Keratea, is of direct and individual concern to it insofar as it is a public body responsible for the protection of public health and the environment in the area of the subsidised project.
The applicant claims that the contested decision — the content of which it maintains came to its notice on 13 August 2007 — infringes a number of provisions of primary Community law for the protection of health and the environment as well as provisions of secondary Community law laying down the relevant detailed provisions.
Specifically, the applicant claims that the financing of the project contravenes the aims of maintaining, protecting and improving the quality of the environment, the protection of public health and the prudent and rational use of physical resources. In addition, in the applicant's view, the contested Commission decision infringes first and foremost Articles 3, 4 and 6 of Directive 75/442 (1) and Articles 3 and 4 of Directive 91/156 (2), which lay down specific obligations in the areas of prevention or reduction of waste production and its harmfulness.
Lastly, according the applicant, it is clear that the creation of a waste management and disposal facility within a protected area cannot in any circumstances be regarded as a project eligible for financing by a financial instrument such as the Cohesion Fund, which by definition should finance only works complying with the requirements of protection of the environment.
(1) Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste (OJ 1975 L 194, p. 39).
(2) Council Directive 91/156/EEC of 18 March 1991 amending Directive 75/442/EEC on waste (OJ 1991 L 78, p. 32).