16.4.2005   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 93/24


JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 3 February 2005

in Case T-139/01 Comafrica SpA and Dole Fresh Fruit Europe Ltd & Co v Commission of the European Communities (1)

(Common organisation of the markets - Bananas - Imports from ACP States and third countries - Regulation (EC) No 896/2001 - Regulation (EC) No 1121/2001 - Action for annulment - Admissibility - Person individually concerned - Action for damages)

(2005/C 93/48)

Language of the case: English

In Case T-139/01: Comafrica SpA, established in Genoa (Italy) and Dole Fresh Fruit Europe Ltd & Co., established in Hamburg (Germany), represented by B. O'Connor, Solicitor, and P. Bastos-Martin, Barrister, supported by Simba SpA, established in Milan (Italy), represented by S. Carbone and F. Munari, lawyers, against the Commission of the European Communities, (Agents: initially L. Visaggio, M. Niejahr and K. Fitch, and subsequently L. Visaggio and K. Fitch, with an address for service in Luxembourg), supported by the Kingdom of Spain, (Agents: initially R. Silva de Lapuerta, and subsequently L. Fraguas Gadea, with an address for service in Luxembourg) — action, first, for annulment of Commission Regulation (EC) No 896/2001 of 7 May 2001 laying down detailed rules for applying Council Regulation (EEC) No 404/93 as regards the arrangements for importing bananas into the Community (OJ 2001 L 126, p. 6), and of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1121/2001 of 7 June 2001 fixing the adjustment coefficients to be applied to each traditional operator's reference quantity under the tariff quotas for imports of bananas (OJ 2001 L 153, p. 12), and, second, an action for compensation for damage allegedly caused to the applicants by the adoption of Regulations No 896/2001 and No 1121/2001 — the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber), composed of P. Lindh, President, R. García-Valdecasas and J.D. Cooke, Judges; J. Plingers, Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 3 February 2005, in which it:

1.

Dismisses as inadmissible the claim for annulment;

2.

Dismisses as unfounded the claim for compensation;

3.

Orders the applicants to bear their own costs and those incurred by the Commission in the main proceedings and in the interim proceedings;

4.

Orders the intervening parties to bear their own costs.


(1)  OJ C 245 of 1.9.2001.