Order of the Court of First Instance of 27 November 2001 in Case T-222/00: Otto Wöhr GmbH v Commission of the European Communities (State aid — Approval decisions — Refusal to open the procedure pursuant to Article 88(2) EC — Complaint — Admissibility)
Date: 2002-06-01
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, Germany, State aid, action for annulment (EU), control of State aid

C 131/18

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

1.6.2002

ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 27 November 2001

in Case T-222/00: Otto Wöhr GmbH v Commission of the
European Communities (1)

(State aid — Approval decisions — Refusal to open the
procedure pursuant to Article 88(2) EC — Complaint —
Admissibility)

(2002/C 131/34)

(Language of the case: German)

In Case T-222/00: Otto Wöhr GmbH, established at Friolzheim
(Germany), represented by C. Hebel and G. Walz, v Com-
mission of the European Communities, (Agents: K.-D. Borch-
ardt and M. Nun˜ ez-Müller), — application for annulment of
the Commission’s decision of 26 June 2000 not to open the
formal examination procedure pursuant to Article 88(2) EC,
following the complaint lodged by the applicant concerning
State aid in favour of Hydraulik Markranstädt GmbH and
Hydraulik Seehausen GmbH, — the Court of First Instance
(Second Chamber, Extended Composition), composed of
R.M. Moura Ramos, President, V. Tiili. J. Pirrung, P. Mengozzi
and A.W.H. Meij, Judges; H. Jung, Registrar, made an order on
27 November 2001, the operative part of which is as follows:

The application is dismissed as inadmissible.

The parties are ordered to pay their own costs.

1.

2.

3.

of 17 January 2002

in Case T-236/00: Gabriele Stauner and Others v European
Parliament and Commission of the European Communi-
ties (1)

(Action for annulment — Framework agreement on relations
between the European Parliament and the Commission —
Article 197 EC — Inadmissibility)

(2002/C 131/35)

(Language of the case: German)

In Case T-236/00: Gabriele Stauner, residing in Wolfratshausen
(Germany), Freddy Blak, residing in Næstved (Denmark),
Mogens Camre, residing in Copenhagen (Denmark), Rijk
van Dam, residing in Rotterdam (Netherlands), Christopher
residing in Kettering, Northamptonshire
Heaton-Harris,
(United Kingdom), Franz-Xaver Mayer, residing in Landau-
sur-l’Isar (Germany), Ursula Schleicher, residing in Munich
(Germany), Jens-Peter Bonde, residing in Bagsværd (Denmark),
Theodorus Bouwman, residing in Eindhoven (Netherlands),
Kathalijne Maria Buitenweg, residing in Amsterdam (Nether-
lands), Michl Ebner, residing in Bolzano (Italy), Joost Lagendijk,
residing in Rotterdam, Nelly Maes, residing in Sinaai (Belgium),
Franziska Emilia Müller, residing in Bruck (Upper Palatinate)
(Germany), Alexander Radwan, residing in Rottach-Egern
(Germany), Alexander de Roo, residing in Amsterdam, Heide
Rühle, residing in Stuttgart (Germany), Inger Schöring, residing
in Gävle (Sweden), Esko Olavi Seppänen, residing in Helsinki
(Finland), Bart Staes, residing in Antwerp (Belgium), Claude
Turmes, residing in Esch-sur-Alzette (Luxembourg), Lousewies
van der Laan, residing in Brussels (Belgium), Members of
the European Parliament, represented by J. Sedemund and
T. Lübbig, Rechtsanwälte, with an address for service in
Luxembourg, against European Parliament (Agents: C. Pennera
and M. Berger) and Commission of the European Communities
(Agents: U. Wölker and X. Lewis), — application for annulment
of the Framework Agreement of 5 July 2000 on Relations
between the European Parliament and the Commission (OJ
2001 C 121, p. 122), — the Court of First Instance (Fourth
Chamber), composed of M. Vilaras, President, V. Tiili and
P. Mengozzi, Judges; H. Jung, Registrar, has made an order on
17 January 2002, in which it:

There is no need to give a decision on the Federal Republic of
Germany’s application to intervene.

1. Dismisses the application as inadmissible.

(1) OJ C 316 of 4.11.2000.

2. Orders the applicants to pay their own costs and those of the
Parliament and the Commission, including those incurred in
the proceedings for interim measures.

(1) OJ C 316 of 4.11.2000.