Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 17 December 2003 in Case T-219/99: British Airways plc v Commission of the European Communities (Competition — Abuse of a dominant position — Competence of the Commission Discrimination between airlines — Relevant product and geographic market — Nexus between the product markets allegedly affected — Legal basis of the contested decision — Existence of a dominant position — Abuse of the dominant position — Proportionality of the amount of the fine)
Date: 2004-03-20
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment (EU), air transport, competition, dominant position, transport company

C 71/22

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

20.3.2004

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 17 December 2003

of 18 December 2003

in Case T-219/99: British Airways plc v Commission of
the European Communities (1)

in Case T-326/99: Nancy Fern Olivieri v Commission of
the European Communities and European Agency for the
Evaluation of Medicinal Products (1)

(Competition — Abuse of a dominant position — Com-
petence of the Commission Discrimination between airlines
— Relevant product and geographic market — Nexus
between the product markets allegedly affected — Legal
basis of the contested decision — Existence of a dominant
the dominant position — Pro-
position — Abuse of

portionality of the amount of the fine)

(Medicinal product — Marketing authorisation — Opinion
of the European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal
Products — Admissibility — Interest in bringing proceedings
— Public health — Verification of reported data — Review
of scientific evaluations — Professional reputation)

(2004/C 71/39)

(2004/C 71/38)

(Language of the case: English)

(Language of the case: English)

In Case T-219/99, British Airways plc, established in Waterside
(United Kingdom), represented by W. Allan and O. Black,
solicitors, W. Wood and H. Davies, barristers, with an address
for service in Luxembourg, v Commission of the European
Communities (Agents: M. Erhart and A. Barav), supported by
Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd, established in Crawley (United
Kingdom), represented by P. Binetter, solicitor, N. Green and
C. West, barristers: Application for the annulment under
Article 230 EC of Commission Decision 2000/74/EC of
14 July 1999 relating to a proceeding under Article 82 of the
EC Treaty (IV/D-2/34.780 Virgin/British Airways) (OJ 2000
L 30, p. 1), the Court of First Instance (First Chamber),
composed of: B. Vesterdorf, President, M. Jaeger and H. Legal,
Judges; J. Palacio González, Principal Administrator, for the
Registrar, has given a judgment on 17 December 2003, in
which it:

1. Dismisses the application;

2. Orders the applicant to bear its own costs and to pay those

incurred by the Commission and by the intervener.

In Case T-326/99, Nancy Fern Olivieri, resident in Toronto
(Canada), represented by N. Green QC and J. Marks, barrister,
and R. Stein, solicitor, with an address for service in Luxem-
bourg, v Commission of the European Communities and
European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products
(Agents: R. Wainwright and H. C. Støvlbæk), supported by
Apotex Europe Ltd, established in Leeds (United Kingdom),
represented by P. Bogaert, G. Berrisch, lawyers: Application
for annulment of the Commission Decision of 25 August
1999 granting marketing authorisation for the medicinal
product
for human use known as Ferriprox-Deferiprone
[C(1999) 2820] and of the revised Opinion of the European
Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products of 23 June
1999, the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber), composed
of: R. García-Valdecasas, President, P. Lindh and J.D. Cooke,
Judges; J. Plingers, Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a
judgment on 18 December 2003, in which it:

1. Dismisses the application as inadmissible;

2. Orders the applicant to bear her own costs and to pay those
incurred by the Commission and the European Agency for the
Evaluation of Medicinal Products, including those relating to
the interim proceedings;

3. Orders the intervener to bear its own costs, both in the main

proceedings and in the interim proceedings.

(1) OJ C 20 of 22.1.2000.

(1) OJ C 47 of 19.2.2000.