Case T-139/07: Action brought on 2 May 2007 — Pioneer Hi-Bred International v Commission
Date: 2007-07-07
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment (EU), drafting of EU law, environmental protection, maize, marketing, transgenic plant

C 155/28

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

7.7.2007

— Absence of conditions for the joint and several liability of

Schindler Holding Ltd;

— Breach of Article 23(2) of Regulation No 1/2003 on the
ground that the maximum limits for fines were exceeded.

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the
implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81
and 82 of the Treaty (OJ 2003 L 1, p. 1).

(2) Guidelines on the method of setting fines imposed pursuant to
Article 15(2) of Regulation No 17 and Article 65(5) of the ECSC
Treaty (OJ 1998 C 9, p. 3).

(3) Commission notice on immunity from fines and reduction of fines

in cartel cases (OJ 2002 C 45, p. 3).

Action brought on 2 May 2007 — Pioneer Hi-Bred
International v Commission

(Case T-139/07)

(2007/C 155/53)

Language of the case: English

time prescribed in the directive. The applicant
furthermore
submits that by failing to submit to the Regulatory Committee a
draft of the measures to be taken the Commission failed to
ensure that such a decision was adopted even though all require-
ments on the applicant and other parties under the directive
had been completed in accordance with the directive.

The applicant moreover submits that the Commission has been
called upon to define its position within the terms of Article
232 EC which the Commission has failed to do. This has,
according to the applicant, had adverse effects on the applicant's
legal situation.

(1) Directive 2001/18/EC of

the
Council of 12 March 2001 on the deliberate release into the environ-
ment of genetically modified organisms and repealing Council Direc-
tive 90/220/EEC (OJ 2001 L 106, p. 1).

the European Parliament and of

Action brought on 26 April 2007 — Chi Mei Optoelectro-
and Chi Mei Optoelectronics UK v
nics Europe

Commission

(Case T-140/07)

(2007/C 155/54)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Pioneer Hi-Bred International
(represented by: J. Temple Lang, Solicitor)

Inc.

(Johnston, USA)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Parties

Form of order sought

— Find that the Commission has failed to act in accordance
with Article 18 of Directive 2001/18 on the deliberate
release into the environment of genetically modified organ-
isms,
to the Regulatory
Committee a draft of the measures to be taken pursuant to
Article 5(2) of the Council decision;

in having failed to submit

— order the Commission to pay the applicant's costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

to Article 232 EC,

The applicant claims, pursuant
the
Commission has failed to act, in infringement of Article 18 of
Directive 2001/18/EC on the deliberate release into the environ-
ment of genetically modified organisms (1), to ensure the adop-
tion of a decision concerning the applicant's notification for the
placing on the market of insect-resistant genetically modified
maize 1507.

that

The applicant contends that under the procedure set out in the
directive, the Commission is obliged to ensure that a decision
on a notification is adopted and published within the period of

Applicants: Chi Mei Optoelectronics Europe BV (Hoofddorp, The
Netherlands), Chi Mei Optoelectronics UK Ltd (Havant, United
Kingdom)
(represented by: S. Völcker, F. Louis, A. Vallery,
lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

The applicants respectfully ask the Court to

— annul the contested decision in its entirety; and

— order the Commission to bear the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

By means of their application the applicants seek annulment of
Commission Decision C (2007)546 of 15 February 2007 on
the basis of which the Commission, has compelled the appli-
cants, pursuant to Article 18(3) of Council Regulation No 1/
2003 (1), to provide specific information and documents related
to practices under investigation in Case COMP/F/39309 — Thin
Films Transistors Liquid Crystal Displays.