Order of the Court of First Instance of 17 September 2003 in Case T-310/97: Nederlandse Antillen v Council of the European Union (Association of the overseas countries and territories — Decision 97/803/EC — Action for annulment — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2003-12-13
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: Council of the European Union, Netherlands Antilles, action for annulment (EU), association agreement (EU), export, overseas countries and territories

13.12.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 304/27

with an address for service in Luxembourg, against Com-
mission of the European Communities (Agents: C. Berardis-
Kayser and F. Clotuche-Duvieusart) — application for annul-
ment of the Commission’s decision refusing to enter the
applicant on the list of officials deemed most deserving of
promotion to Grade B 2 for the 2001 promotion procedure
and also the decision not to promote him — the Court of First
Instance (Third Chamber), composed of K. Lenaerts, President,
and J. Azizi and M. Jaeger, Judges; H. Jung, Registrar, gave a
judgment on 18 September 2003, the operative part of which
is as follows:

1.

2.

The application is dismissed;

The parties shall bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 247 of 12.10.2002.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 30 September 2003

in Joined Cases T-346/02 and T-347/02, Cableuropa SA
and others v Commission of the European Communi-
ties (1)

(Competition — Control of concentrations between under-
takings — Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 — Decision to
refer a concentration to the national authorities — Meaning
of distinct market)

(2003/C 304/49)

(Language of the case: Spanish)

In Joined Cases T-346/02 and T-347/02, Cableuropa SA,
established in Madrid (Spain), Región de Murcia de Cable SA,
established in Murcia (Spain), Valencia de Cable SA, established
in Madrid, Mediterránea Sur Sistemas de Cable SA, established
in Alicante (Spain), Mediterránea Norte Sistemas de Cable SA,
established in Castellón (Spain), represented by L. Castresana
Sánchez and G. Samaniego Bordiu, lawyers, with an address
for service in Luxembourg, Aunacable SA, established in
Madrid, represented by A. Creus Carreras and N. Lacalle
Mangas, lawyers, Sociedad Operadora de Telecomunicaciones
de Castilla y León (Retecal) SA, established in Boecilli (Spain),
Euskaltel SA, established in Zamudio-Bizkaia (Spain), Telecable
de Avilés SA, established in Avilés (Spain), Telecable de Ovieda
SA, established in Oviedo (Spain), Telecable de Gijón SA,
established in Gijón (Spain), R. Cable y Telecomunicaciones
Galicia SA, established in La Coruña (Spain), Tenaria SA,
established in Cordovilla (Spain), represented by J. Jiménez
Laiglesia, lawyer, v Commission of the European Communites
(agent: F. Castillo de la Torre), supported by Kingdom of Spain

(agent: L. Fraguas Gardea), Sogecable SA, established in Madrid,
represented by S. Martinez Lage and H. Brokelmann, lawyers,
DTS Distribuidora de Televisión Digital SA (Vía Digital),
established in Madrid, and Telefónica de Contenidos SAU,
established in Madrid, represented by M. Merola and S. Moreno
Sánchez,
lawyers, application for annulment of the Com-
mission decision of 14 August 2002 referring the examination
of the concentration integrating DTS Distribuidora de Tele-
visión Digital SA (Via Digital) and Sogecable SA to the Spanish
competition authorities in accordance with Article 9 of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 of 21 December 1989 on the
control of concentrations between undertakings (Case COMP/
M.2845 — Sogecable/Canalsatélite Digital/Vía Digital), the
Court of Justice (Third Chamber), composed of A. Lenaerts,
President, and J. Azizi and M. Jaeger, judges: Registrar: J. Palacio
González, Principal Administrator, has delivered a judgment
on 30 September 2003 in which it:

(1)

Joins Cases T-346/02 and T-347/02 for the purposes of the
judgment;

(2) Dismisses the applications;

(3) Orders the applicants to bear their own costs and jointly and
severally to pay the costs of the Commission, Sogecable, Vía
Digital and Telefónica de Contenidos in connection with the
applicants’ actions;

(4) Orders the Kingdom of Spain to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 19 of 24.1.2003.

ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 17 September 2003

in Case T-310/97: Nederlandse Antillen v Council of the
European Union (1)

(Association of the overseas countries and territories —
Decision 97/803/EC — Action for annulment — Inadmissi-
bility)

(2003/C 304/50)

(Language of the case: English)

In Case T-310/97, Nederlandse Antillen, represented by
P.V.F. Bos and M. Slotboom, lawyers, with an address for
service in Luxembourg, v Council of the European Union
(Agents: J. Huber and G. Houttuin), supported by Commission
the European Communities (Agents: T. van Rijn and
of

C 304/28

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

13.12.2003

X. Lewis), Kingdom of Spain (Agent: N. Díaz Abad) and
French Republic (Agents: K. Rispal-Bellanger and C. Chavance),
APPLICATION for annulment of Council Decision 97/803/EC
of 24 November 1997 amending at mid-term, Decision 91/
482/EEC on the association of the overseas countries and
territories with the European Economic Community (OJ 1997
L 329, p. 50), the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber),
composed of: K. Lenaerts, President, J. Azizi and M. Jaeger,
Judges; H. Jung, Registrar, has made an order on 17 September
2003, the operative part of which is as follows:

1.

2.

The application is dismissed as inadmissible;

The applicant is to bear its own costs and to pay those of the
Council, including those relating to the proceedings for interim
relief;

3.

The interveners are to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 55 of 20.02.1998.

1.

2.

3.

The application is dismissed as inadmissible;

The applicant is to bear its own costs and to pay those of the
Council;

The interveners are to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 137 of 2.5.1998.

ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 17 September 2003

in Case T-54/98: Aruba v Commission of the European
Communities (1)

ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 17 September 2003

(Association of the overseas countries and territories —
Imports into the Community of sugar originating in Aruba
— Regulation (EC) No 2553/97 — Action for annulment
— Inadmissibility)

in Case T-36/98: Aruba v Council of the European
Union (1)

(Association of the overseas countries and territories —
Decision 97/803/EC — Action for annulment — Inadmissi-
bility)

(2003/C 304/52)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

(2003/C 304/51)

(Language of the case: English)

In Case T-36/98: Aruba, represented by P.V.F. Bos and M.
Slotboom, lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg,
against the Council of the European Union (Agents: J. Huber
and G. Houttuin), supported by the Commission of
the
European Communities (Agents T. van Rijn and X. Lewis) and
by the Kingdom of Spain (Agent: N. Díaz Abad) — application
for annulment of Council Decision 97/803/EC of 24 Novem-
ber 1997 amending at mid-term, Decision 91/482/EEC on the
association of the overseas countries and territories with the
European Economic Community (OJ 1997 L 329, p. 50) —
the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber), composed of
K. Lenaerts, President, J. Azizi and M. Jaeger, Judges; H. Jung,
Registrar, has made an order on 17 September 2003, the
operative part of which is as follows:

In Case T-54/98: Aruba, represented by P. Bos and M. Slot-
boom, lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg,
against the Commission of the European Communities (Agent:
T. van Rijn), supported by the Council of the European Union
(Agents: J. Huber and G. Houttuin) and by the United Kingdom
of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (Agent: R. Magrill) —
application for annulment of Commission Regulation (EC)
No 2553/97 of 17 December 1997 on rules for issuing import
licences for certain products covered by CN codes 1701, 1702,
1703 and 1704 and qualifying as ACP/OCT originating
products (OJ 1997 L 349, p. 26) — the Court of First Instance
(Third Chamber), composed of K. Lenaerts, President, J. Azizi
and M. Jaeger, Judges; H. Jung, Registrar, has made an order
on 17 September 2003, the operative part of which is as
follows:

1.

2.

The application is dismissed as inadmissible;

The applicant is to bear its own costs and to pay those of the
Commission;