Case T-342/00: Action brought on 13 November 2000 by Petrolessence SA and Société de Gestion et de Restauration Routière S.A. ("Le Mirabellier") against Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2001-01-06
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment (EU), competition law, economic concentration, merger control, oil industry

6.1.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 4/11

Action brought on 13 November 2000 by Petrolessence
SA and Société de Gestion et de Restauration Routière
S.A. (‘Le Mirabellier’) against Commission of the European
Communities

(Case T-342/00)

(2001/C 4/17)

(Language of the case: French)

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 13 November 2000 by Petrolessen-
ce S.A. and Société de Gestion et de Restauration Routière S.A.
(‘Le Mirabellier’), established in Nancy (France), represented by
Frédéric Puel and Miguel Troncoso Ferrer, of the Brussels Bar.

The applicants claim that the Court should:

— annul decision SG(2000)D/106729 of 13 September
2000 in so far as it states that the applicants have not
in paragraph 1b of the
met
undertakings of the parties in Case Comp/M.1628 —
Totalfina/Elf and inasmuch as it rejects their application
to take six petrol service stations;

the conditions set out

Pleas in law and main arguments

On 9 February 2000, the European Commission adopted a
decision whereby it declared the acquisition of Elf Aquitaine
S.A. by Totalfina compatible with the common market and
with the Agreement on the European Economic Area. That
decision was subject to the compliance by Totalfina with a
including the undertaking to sell
number of undertakings,
70 petrol stations located on the French motorway network,
specifically set out in a table appended to the decision.

The present case has been brought against the decision of the
Commission of 13 September 2000 (SG (2000) D/106729)
rejecting the plan submitted by Totalfina S.A., with the purpose
of implementing the abovementioned decision of 9 February
2000 Totalfina/Elf (COMP/M. 1628). That decision rejected
the plan put
two
prospective purchasers, one of which was the applicant itself,
were not in a position to compete effectively against Totalfina.

forward on account of

the fact

that

In support of its arguments, the applicant puts forward the
following pleas in law:

— Breach of essential procedural requirements, within the
meaning of Article 230(2) of the EC Treaty, inasmuch as
the contested decision was adopted after the expiry of the
period prescribed to that end in point I.4 of the Annex to
the abovementioned decision of 9 February 2000.
— Infringement of Article 2(1) of Regulation No 4064/89 (1)
in that various parts of the decision do not take into
account either the actual structure of the market con-
cerned or of the applicants’ potential competitors, so that
the implementation of the abovementioned decision of
9 February does not succeed in developing effective
competition on the market for petrol stations on French
motorways.

— order the Commission of the European Communities to

pay all the costs.

(1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 of 21 December 1989 on
the control of concentrations between undertakings (OJ 1989
L 395, p. 1).