Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 1 December 2004 in Case T-27/02: Kronofrance SA v Commission of the European Communities (State aid — Commission decision not to raise objections — Action for annulment — Admissibility — Multisectoral framework on regional aid for large investment projects)
Date: 2005-02-05
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, Germany, action for annulment (EU), aid for restructuring, aid to undertakings, competition, investment promotion, non-refundable aid, wood industry

C 31/18

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

5.2.2005

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

Community aid provided for in that regulation to the producers
concerned;

of 23 November 2004

in Case T-166/98: Cantina sociale di Dolianova Soc. coop.
rl and Others v Commission of the European Commu-
nities (1)

2. Orders the parties to notify the Court, within four months of
delivery of this judgment, of the amount of compensation fixed by
mutual agreement;

3. In the event that no agreement is reached, orders the parties to
inform the Court, within the same period, of the figures they
propose.

(Common organisation of the market in wine — Regulation
(EEC) No 2499/82 — Community aid — Action for annul-
ment — Action for declaration of failure to act — Action for
compensation)

(1) OJ C 378 of 5.12.1998.

(2005/C 31/35)

(Language of the case: Italian)

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

In Case T-166/98: Cantina sociale di Dolianova Soc. coop. rl,
established in Dolianova (Italy), Cantina Trexenta Soc. coop. rl,
established in Senorbì
(Italy), Cantina sociale Marmilla –
Unione viticoltori associati Soc. coop. rl, established in Sanluri
(Italy), Cantina sociale S. Maria La Palma Soc. coop. rl, estab-
lished in Santa Maria La Palma (Italy), Cantina sociale del
Vermentino Soc. coop. rl Monti-Sassari, established in Monti
(Italy), represented by C. Dore and G. Dore, lawyers, with an
address for service in Luxembourg, against the Commission of
(Agents:
the European Communities
initially, F. Ruggeri
Laderchi and A. Alves Vieira,
then A. Alves Vieira and L.
Visaggio, with an address for service in Luxembourg) – action
under Article 173 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment,
Article 230 EC) for annulment of the Commission's letter of 31
July 1998 refusing to pay directly to the applicants aid for
preventive distillation for the wine year 1982/1983 or, under
for a
Article 175 of the EC Treaty (now Article 232 EC)
declaration that the Commission unlawfully failed to act or, in
the further alternative, under Article 178 of the EC Treaty (now
Article 253 EC) for compensation for the loss allegedly suffered
by the applicants as a result of the Commission's conduct – the
Court of First
J.
Pirrung, President, A.W.H. Meij and N.J. Forwood, Judges; J.
Palacio Gonzàlez, Principal Administrator,
for the Registrar,
gave a judgment on 23 November 2004, in which it:

Instance (Second Chamber), composed of

1. Orders the Commission to pay compensation for the loss suffered
by the applicants, following the insolvency of Distilleria Agricola
Industriale de Terralba, as a result of the lack of a scheme guaran-
teeing, under the rules laid down in Article 9 of Commission
Regulation (EEC) No 2499/82 laying down provisions concerning
preventive distillation for the 1982/83 wine year, payment of the

of 1 December 2004

in Case T-27/02: Kronofrance SA v Commission of the
European Communities (1)

(State aid — Commission decision not to raise objections —
Action for annulment — Admissibility — Multisectoral
framework on regional aid for large investment projects)

(2005/C 31/36)

(Language of the case: German)

represented by H.-J. Niemeyer

In Case T-27/02: Kronofrance SA, established in Sully-sur-Loire
(France), represented by R. Nierer, lawyer, against Commission
the European Communities (Agents: V. Kreuschitz and
of
J. Flett, with an address for service in Luxembourg), supported
by Glunz AG and OSB Deutschland GmbH, established in
Meppen (Germany),
and
K. Ziegler, lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg
– application for annulment of Commission Decision SG
(2001) D of 25 July 2001 not to object to the aid granted by
the German authorities to Glunz AG – the Court of First
Instance (Fourth Chamber, Extended Composition), composed
I. Wiszniewska-
of: H. Legal, President, V. Tiili, M. Vilaras,
Białecka and V. Vadapalas, Judges; J. Plingers, Administrator,
for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 1 December 2004,
in which it:

5.2.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 31/19

1. Annuls Commission Decision SG (2001) D of 25 July 2001 not
to object to the aid granted by the German authorities to Glunz
AG;

2. Orders the Commission, in addition to bearing its own costs, to

pay those incurred by the applicant;

3. Orders Glunz AG and OSB Deutschland GmbH to bear the costs

which they incurred in connection with their intervention.

(1) OJ C 118 of 18.5.2002.

and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43) – the
Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber, Extended Composition),
composed of: P. Lindh, President, R. García-Valdecasas,
J.D.
Cooke, P. Mengozzi and M.E. Martins Ribeiro, Judges; D. Chris-
tensen, Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment
on 30 November 2004, in which it:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders the applicant

to bear its own costs and to pay those

incurred by the Commission;

3. Orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the Kingdom of Sweden,
the Kingdom of Denmark and the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Northern Ireland to bear their own costs.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

(1) OJ C 202 of 24.8.2002.

of 30 November 2004

in Case T-168/02: IFAW Internationaler Tierschutz-Fonds
gGmbH v Commission of the European Communities (1)

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

(Action for annulment — Access to documents — Regulation
(EC) No 1049/2001 — Article 4(5) — No disclosure of a
document from a Member State without the prior agreement
of that State)

(2005/C 31/37)

(Language of the case: English)

IFAW Internationaler Tierschutz-Fonds
In Case T-168/02:
gGmbH,
(IFAW)
formerly Internationaler Tierschutz-Fonds
GmbH, established in Hamburg (Germany), represented by S.
Crosby, Solicitor, supported by the Kingdom of the Netherlands
(Agents: H. Sevenster, S. Terstal, N. Bel and C. Wissels, with an
address for service in Luxembourg), the Kingdom of Sweden
(Agents: A. Kruse and K. Wistrand, with an address for service
in Luxembourg) and the Kingdom of Denmark (Agents: initially
J. Bering Liisberg, and subsequently J. Molde, with an address
for service in Luxembourg), against the Commission of the
European Communities (Agents: C. Docksey and P. Aalto, with
an address for service in Luxembourg), supported by the
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (repre-
sented by R. Caudwell, acting as Agent, and M. Hoskins,
Barrister, with an address for service in Luxembourg) – applica-
tion for annulment of the Commission's decision of 26 March
2002 refusing to grant the applicant access to certain docu-
in
ments, relating to the declassification of a protected site,
accordance with Article 4(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001
of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May
2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council

of 24 November 2004

in Case T-393/02: Henkel KGaA v Office for Harmonisa-
tion in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
(OHIM) (1)

(Community trade mark — Three-dimensional mark —
Shape of a white and transparent bottle — Absolute ground
for refusal — Distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of
Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

(2005/C 31/38)

(Language of the case: German)

represented by C. Osterrieth,

In Case T-393/02: Henkel KGaA, established in Düsseldorf
(Germany),
lawyer, with an
address for service in Luxembourg, against Office for Harmoni-
sation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs)
(Agents: U. Pfleghar and G. Schneider) – action
(OHIM)
brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of
OHIM of 3 October 2002 (Case R 313/2001-4), concerning
the registration of a three-dimensional sign constituted by the
shape of a white and transparent bottle – the Court of First
Instance (Fourth Chamber), composed of H. Legal, President, V.
Tiili and M. Vilaras, Judges; J. Plingers, Administrator, for the
Registrar, has given a judgment on 24 November 2004,
in
which it: