Compagnie industrielle et agricole du comté de Loheac and others v Council and Commission of the European Communities (C-54/76, C-55/76, C-56/76, C-57/76, C-58/76, C-59/76, C-60/76)

II —Conclusions of the parties

All the applicants claim that the Court should;‘Grant their applications for compensation in respect of the non-contractual liability of the Community and order that the Council and the Commission, in accordance with the general principles common to the laws of the Member States, should make good the damage caused to them by both Regulation No 1009/67/EEC of the Council of 18 December 1967 on the common organization of the market in sugar, adopted on a proposal from the Commission, and a number of subsequent regulations.’and are jointly and severally liable to pay sums amounting to— FF 671536 (Case 54/76)— FF 395234 (Case 55/76)— FF 7992279 (Case 56/76)— FF 2037895 (Case 57/76)— FF 3606000 (Case 58/76)— FF 3783000 (Case 59/76)— FF 2639000 (Case 60/76)‘in principal and interest calculated at the rate of 8 % from 1 July 1971 to 1 July 1976 (with the interests to be made up to the date of the delivery of the judgment of the Court), in compensation for the damage suffered by the applicant during the 1971/72, 1972/73, 1973/74 and 1974/75 sugar years.’Furthermore, the applicants made the following claim in the course of their observations:‘That without prejudice to any of the other submissions the Court should rule that the Community regulations previous to Regulation No 3330/74 were manifestly vitiated by illegality and that they constituted in addition a wrongful act or omission on the part of the Community institutions and caused the applicants direct, special and abnormal damage.’In its defence, the Commission contended that the Court should:— ‘Dismiss the applications as unfounded;— Order the applicants to bear the costs.’In its defence, the Council contended that the Court should:‘Declare all the claims of the applicants unfounded, dismiss them, and order the applicants to bear the costs.’In their reply, the applicants maintained their initial conclusions.In its rejoinder, the Commission maintained its contention that the Court should ‘dismiss the applications as entirely unfounded,’ while the Council contended that the Court should ‘declare the applications … inadmissible and at any event unfounded, dismiss them and order the applicants to bear all the costs.’

Source: EUR-Lex, © European Union, 1998-2026. Reuse authorised under Decision 2011/833/EU.

Key facts

Court

Court of Justice · Full Court

Cases

C-54/76, C-55/76, C-56/76, C-57/76, C-58/76, C-59/76, C-60/76 · ECLI:EU:C:1977:58

Decided

31 Mar 1977

Procedure

Action for damages

Applicants

(1)54/76: COMPAGNIE INDUSTRIELLE ET AGRICOLE DU COMTE DE LOHEAC, having its registered office at Sainte-Rose (Guadeloupe), represented by its Managing Director, C. Simmonnet,(2)55/76: COMPAGNIE SUCRIÈRE ET RHUMIÈRE DE LA MARTINIQUE, having its registered office at Galion-Trinité (Martinique), represented by its General Manager, Mr de Laguarigur,(3)56/76: SOCIÉTÉ INDUSTRIELLE DE SUCRERIE, having its registered office at Paris 8e, represented by its General Manager, Mr de la Rochefoucauld,(4)57/76: DISTILLERIE SUCRERIE GROSSE-MONTAGNE, having its registered office at Lamentin (Guadeloupe), represented by its Manager, C. Simmonnet,(5)58/76: SOCIÉTÉ SUCRIÈRE DE LA GRAND TERRE, having its registered office at Gardel-Le-Moule (Guadeloupe), represented by its General Manager, A. Huygues-Despointes,(6)59/76: SOCIÉTÉ DES USINES DE BEAUPORT, having its registered office at Bordeaux, represented by its Chairman and General Manager, Mr Ardant,(7)60/76: SOCIÉTÉ D'EXPLOITATION SUCRIÈRE DE MARIE-GALANTE, having its registered office at Pointe-à-Pitre (Guadeloupe), represented by its Chairman and General Manager, Mr Huygues-Despointes; all assisted by Dominique Voillemot and Xavier de Roux, Advocates at the Cour d'Appel, Paris, 26, Cours Albert 1er — 75008 Paris, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Georges Reuter, 1 avenue de l'Arsenal

Defendants

COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, represented by Daniel Vignes, Director in the Legal Department and Felix Van Craeyenest, member of that Department, acting as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the offices of J. N. Van den Houten, Director of the Legal Department of the European Investment Bank, 2, place de Metz; and; COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, represented by its Legal Adviser, Peter Gilsdorf, acting as Agent, assisted by Jacques Delmoly, member of the Legal Service, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the offices of Mario Cervino, Legal Adviser to the Commission, Jean Monnet Building

Rapporteur

Touffait

Advocate General

Reischl

Bench

7 judges

A. M. Donner, P. Pescatore, J. Mertens de Wilmars, M. Sørensen, A. O'Keeffe, G. Bosco, A. Touffait

Language

French

Official

CURIA · EUR-Lex 61976CJ0054

Compagnie industrielle et agricole du comté de Loheac and others v Council and Commission of the European Communities (C-54/76, C-55/76, C-56/76, C-57/76, C-58/76, C-59/76, C-60/76)

II —Conclusions of the parties

Connections

History · 1 version

II —Conclusions of the parties

Key facts