Asunto C-153/04 P: Recurso de casación interpuesto el 26 de marzo de 2004 (fax de 23 de mazo de 2004) por Euroagri srl contra la sentencia dictada el 28 de enero de 2004 por la Sala Segunda del Tribunal de Primera Instancia de las Comunidades Europeas en el asunto T-180/01, entreEuroagri srl y la Comisión de las Comunidades Europeas

• Jurisdiction: European Union
• Celex Number: C2004/106/80
• Published date: 01 December 2004

30.4.2004 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 106/46

---

Appeal brought on 26 March 2004 (fax 23 March 2004) by Euroagri srl against the judgment delivered on 28 January 2004 by the Second Chamber of the Court of First Instance in Case T-180/01 between Euroagri srl and the Commission of the European Communities

(Case C-153/04 P)

(2004/C 106/80)

An appeal against the judgment of the Second Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities of 28 January 2004 in Case T-180/01 between Euroagri srl and the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 26 March 2004 by Euroagri srl, represented by W. Masucci, lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the judgment at first instance delivered by the Court of First Instance of the European Communities in Case T-180/01 and accordingly grant the forms of order sought by the applicant company at first instance, cited and transcribed in full here:

— on the merits: annul the contested decision;

— in the alternative: annul the contested decision in part and reduce the assistance granted to the applicant in proportion to the assistance actually provided;

— on the merits, in the preparatory inquiries: order the Commission to produce all the reports it sent to the applicant on the Endovena project, order the examination of witnesses and the personal appearance of the applicant itself, and also the making of an expert's report and/or an on-the-spot check;

— in addition, it reiterates in all the requests for preparatory inquiries already put forward at first instance the irregular form of the submissions of the Commission.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

The applicant maintains that the contested decision is unlawful on the following grounds:

— failure to state reasons and infringement of the principle of due process and the rights of the defence;

— infringement of Article 24 of Regulation No 4253/88 (obligation to request the Member State to submit comments)

— infringement of Article 25 of Regulation No 4253/88 (obligation to ensure monitoring)

— mistaken assessment of the alleged irregularities committed by the...