C-250/86

Avis juridique important | 61986J0250 Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 29 June 1989. - Refinarias de Açúcar Reunidas SA (RAR) v Council and Commission of the European Communities. - Application for a declaration that a measure is void - Admissibility - Aids to raw sugar refineries. - Joined cases 250/86 and 11/87. European Court reports 1989 Page 02045 Pub.RJ Page Pub somm Summary Parties Operative part Keywords ++++ Application for a declaration that a measure is void - Natural or legal persons - Measures of direct and individual concern to them - Provisions laid down by a regulation concerning the conditions for disposing of a certain type of sugar and the supply of raw materials to the sugar refineries established in a Member State ( EEC Treaty, second paragraph of Art . 173; Council Regulation No 2225/86, Art . 3; Commission Regulation No 3214/86, Arts 2(1)(b ) and 6(b ) ) Summary Neither the provisions laid down by regulation instituting an aid for the refining of raw sugars originating in the French Overseas Departments granted to all the refineries situated in the European territories of the Member States nor those instituting an aid to the refining in Portuguese refineries of raw sugar obtained from beet harvested in the Community are of individual concern, within the meaning of the second paragraph of Article 173 of the Treaty, to one of the Portuguese refineries . Such an undertaking is concerned by those provisions solely in its objective capacity as a sugar refinery in the same way as any other economic operator in an identical situation, so that it does not fulfil one of the conditions which, as the Court has consistently held ( see judgment of 24 February 1987 in Case 26/86 Deutz und Geldermann v Council (( 1987 )) ECR 941 ), govern the admissibility of proceedings instituted by an individual for the annulment of a measure adopted in the form of a regulation . Parties In Joined Cases 250/86 and 11/87 Refinarias de Açúcar Reunidas SA ( RAR ), whose registered office is in Oporto, represented and assisted by Nuno Ruiz, of the Lisbon Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Guy Harles, 4 avenue Marie-Thérèse, applicant, v Council of the European Communities, represented by Antonio Sacchettini, Director in its Legal Department, assisted by Antonio Lucidi, a member of its Legal Department, acting as Agents, and by I . Lopes Cardoso, also a member of its Legal Department, acting as Deputy Agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of Dr Joerg Kaeser, Manager of the Legal Directorate of the European Investment Bank ( Case 250/86 ), defendant, supported by Commission of the European Communities, represented by Luis Antunes and Peter Oliver, members of its Legal Department, acting as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of Georgios Kremlis, a member of its Legal Department, Centre Wagner, Kirchberg, intervener, and Commission of the European Communities, represented by Luis Antunes and Peter Oliver, members of its Legal Department, acting as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of Georgios Kremlis, a member of its Legal Department, Centre Wagner ( Case 11/87 ), defendant, APPLICATION under the second paragraph of Article 173 of the EEC Treaty for the annulment of : ( i ) Article 3 of Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 2225/86 of 15 July 1986 laying down measures for the marketing of sugar produced in the French Overseas Departments and for the equalization of the price conditions with preferential raw sugar ( Official Journal 1986, L 194, p . 7 ) and ( ii ) Articles 2(1)(b ) and 6(b ) of Commission Regulation ( EEC ) No 3214/86 of 22 October 1986 adopting measures for the supply of raw sugar and beet harvested in the Community to Portuguese refineries during the 1986/87 marketing year ( Official Journal 1986, L 299, p . 24 ), THE COURT ( Sixth Chamber ) composed of : T . Koopmans, President of Chamber, G . F . Mancini, C . N . Kakouris, F . A . Schockweiler and M . Díez de Velasco, Judges, ( the grounds of the judgment are not reproduced ) hereby : Operative part ( 1 ) Dismisses the applications as inadmissible . ( 2 ) Orders the applicant to pay the costs of the Council and of the Commission .