Order of the Court (Second Chamber) of 13 December 2000 in Case C-44/00 P: Société de distribution mécanique et d'automobiles SA (Sodima) v Commission of the European Communities (Competition — Distribution of motor vehicles — Complaint — Action for failure to act, for annulment, and for compensation — Inadmissibility — Appeal in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded)
Date: 2001-07-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: France, General Court (EU), action for annulment (EU), concessionaire, judicial proceedings, motor car

14.7.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 200/27

ORDER OF THE COURT

ORDER OF THE COURT

(Second Chamber)

of 13 December 2000

(Third Chamber)

of 15 December 2000

in Case C-44/00 P: Société de distribution mécanique et
d’automobiles SA (Sodima) v Commission of the Euro-
pean Communities (1)

(Competition — Distribution of motor vehicles — Complaint
— Action for failure to act, for annulment, and for compen-
in part manifestly
sation — Inadmissibility — Appeal

inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded)

in Case C-87/98 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Consiglio di Stato): Questore di Genova v Eliana
Fasciolo (1)

(Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure — Question
identical to one on which the Court has already ruled)

(2001/C 200/47)

(2001/C 200/48)

(Language of the case: French)

(Language of the case: Italian)

(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
in the European Court Reports)

(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
in the European Court Reports)

In Case C-44/00 P: Société de distribution mécanique et
d’automobiles SA (Sodima), a company being wound up by
court order, having its registered office in Istres, France,
represented by J.C. Fourgoux, of the Paris Bar, with an address
for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of P. Schiltz, 4 Rue
Béatrix de Bourbon — Appeal against the judgment of the
Court of First Instance of the European Communities (First
Chamber) of 13 December 1999 in Joined Cases T-190/95
and T-45/96 Sodima v Commission [1999] ECR II-3617,
seeking to have that judgment set aside, the other party to the
proceedings being: Commission of the European Communities
(Agents: G. Marenco and F. Siredey-Garnier) — The Court
(Second Chamber), composed of: V. Skouris, President of the
Chamber, R. Schintgen (Rapporteur) and N. Colneric, Judges;
D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar,
has made an order on 13 December 2000, the operative part
of which is as follows:

1.

2.

The appeal is dismissed.

Société de distribution mécanique et d’automobiles SA (Sodima)
is ordered to pay the costs of the present proceedings.

In Case C-87/98: reference to the Court under Article 177 of
the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) from the Consiglio di Stato
(Italy) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending
before that court between Questore di Genova and Eliana
Fasciolo on the interpretation of the provisions of the EC
Treaty on freedom to provide services — the Court (Third
Chamber), composed of: C. Gulmann, President of the Chamb-
er, J.-P. Puissochet (Rapporteur) and F. Macken, Judges; C. Stix-
Hackl, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has made an
order on 15 December 2000, the operative part of which is as
follows:

The EC Treaty provisions on freedom to provide services do not
preclude national legislation, such as the Italian legislation, which
reserves unto certain bodies the right to take bets on sporting events,
if that legislation is in fact justified by social-policy objectives designed
to limit the harmful effects of such activities and if the restrictions
which it
imposes are not disproportionate in relation to those
objectives.

(1) OJ C 149 of 27.5.2000.

(1) OJ C 209 of 4.7.1998.