Case C-260/05 P: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 22 November 2007 — Sniace SA v Commission of the European Communities — Republic of Austria, Lenzing Fibers GmbH, Land Burgenland (Appeal — State aid — Admissibility — Measure of individual concern to the applicant)
Date: 2007-11-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Austria, General Court (EU), State aid, admissibility, appeal, competition, judicial proceedings, man-made fibre, textile industry

C 8/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

12.1.2008

V

(Announcements)

COURT PROCEEDINGS

COURT OF JUSTICE

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 22 November
2007 — Kingdom of Spain v Commission of the European
Communities

(Case C-525/04 P) (1)

(Appeal — State aid — Non-recovery of contributions, default
surcharges and interest owed — Admissibility — Private
creditor test)

1) Dismisses the appeal;

2) Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay its own costs and those

incurred by Lenzing AG;

3) Orders the Commission of the European Communities to bear its

own costs.

(2008/C 8/02)

(1) OJ C 69, 19.3.2005.

Language of the case: German

Parties

Appellant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by:
Cárcamo, Agent)

J.M. Rodríguez

Other parties to the proceedings: Commission of the European
Communities (represented by: V. Kreuschitz and J. Buendía
Sierra, Agents, M. Núñez-Müller, Rechtsanwalt), Lenzing AG,
(represented by: U. Soltész, Rechtsanwalt)

Re:

annulled Article

Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth
Chamber, Extended Composition) of 21 October 2004 in Case
T-36/99 between Lenzing AG and the Commission in which the
Court
of Commission Decision
1(1)
1999/395/EC of 28 October 1998 on State aid implemented by
Spain in favour of Sniace SA, located in Torrelavega, Cantabria
(OJ 1999 L 149, p. 40), as amended by Commission Decision
2001/43/EC of 20 September 2000 (OJ 2001 L 11, p. 46) —
Admissibility of an action for annulment brought by a compe-
titor of the undertaking benefiting from the aid — Definition of
a person individually concerned by the contested decision —
Agreements on the rescheduling and repayment of debts —
Private creditor test

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 22 November
2007 — Sniace SA v Commission of
the European
Communities — Republic of Austria, Lenzing Fibers
GmbH, Land Burgenland

(Case C-260/05 P) (1)

(Appeal — State aid — Admissibility — Measure of indivi-
dual concern to the applicant)

(2008/C 8/03)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Appellant: Sniace SA (represented by: J. Baró Fuentes, abogado)

Other parties to the proceedings: Commission of the European
Communities (represented by: V. Kreuschitz and J.L. Buendía
Sierra, Agents), Republic of Austria (represented by: H. Dossi,
Agent), Lenzing Fibers GmbH (formerly Lenzing Lyocell GmbH
& Co. KG)
(represented by U. Soltész, Rechtsanwalt), Land
Burgenland (represented by U. Soltész, Rechtsanwalt)

12.1.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 8/3

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth
Chamber (Extended Composition)) of 14 April 2005 in Case
T-88/01 Sniace SA v Commission declaring inadmissible the
appellant's action for annulment of Commission Decision
2001/102/EC of 19 July 2000 on State aid granted by Austria
to Lenzing Lyocell GmbH & Co. KG (OJ 2001 L 38, p. 33)

meaning of Article 1(2) of Directive 2001/83/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 6 November 2001 on the Com-
munity code relating to medicinal products for human use, the
its obligations
Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil
under Article 28 EC and Article 30 EC;

2) The Federal Republic of Germany is ordered to pay the costs.

Operative part of the judgment

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders Sniace SA to pay the costs;

3. Orders the Republic of Austria to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 193, 6.8.2005.

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 15 November
the European Communities v
2007 — Commission of

Federal Republic of Germany

(Case C-319/05) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Articles 28
and 30 EC — Directive 2001/83/EC — Garlic preparation in
capsule form — Preparation legally marketed as a food
supplement in a number of Member States — Preparation
classified as a medicinal product in the Member State of
importation — Definition of ‘medicinal product’ — Obstacle
— Jurisdiction — Public health — Proportionality)

(1) OJ C 257, 15.10.2005.

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 15 November
2007 (reference for
a preliminary ruling from the
Hovrätten för Övre Norrland (Sweden)) — Criminal
proceedings against Fredrik Granberg

(Case C-330/05) (1)

(Excise duties — Mineral oils — Atypical transport)

(2008/C 8/05)

Language of the case: Swedish

Referring court

Hovrätten för Övre Norrland

Party in the main proceedings

Fredrik Granberg

(2008/C 8/04)

Language of the case: German

Re:

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: B. Stromsky and B. Schima, Agents)

Defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: M.
Lumma and C. Schulze-Bahr, Agents)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement
of Articles 28 and 30 EC — National administrative practice
classifying a garlic preparation in capsule form as a medicinal
product — Concept of medicinal product under Community
rules

Operative part of the judgment

1) By classifying as a medicinal product a garlic preparation in capsule
form not satisfying the definition of a medicinal product within the

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Hovrätten för Övre
Norrland — Interpretation of Article 9(3) of Council Directive
92/12/EEC of 25 February 1992 on the general arrangements
for products subject to excise duty and on the holding, move-
ment and monitoring of such products (OJ 1992 L 76, p. 1) —
Import by private individuals of mineral oils already released for
consumption in another Member State — Atypical means of
transport

Operative part of the judgment

The Court rules:

1. Article 9(3) of the Council Directive 92/12/EEC of 25 February
1992 on the general arrangements for products subject to excise
duty and on the holding, movement and monitoring of such
products, as amended by Council Directive 92/108/EEC of
14 December 1992, does not allow Member States generally to
impose excise duty in the Member State of consumption on heating
oil acquired in another Member State by a private individual for
own use and transported by him to the Member State of consump-
tion, irrespective of the means of transport used.