Case T-82/06: Order of the Court of First Instance of 19 February 2008 — Apple Computer International v Commission (Actions for annulment — Common Customs Tariff — Classification in the Combined Nomenclature — Person not individually concerned — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2008-02-19
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: Combined Nomenclature, EC Regulation, European Commission, action for annulment (EU), screen, tariff nomenclature

C 107/26

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

26.4.2008

Order of the Court of First Instance of 19 February 2008
— Apple Computer International v Commission

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: É. Gippini Fournier, M. Shotter and K. Mojzesowicz,
Agents)

(Case T-82/06) (1)

(Actions for annulment — Common Customs Tariff — Classi-
fication in the Combined Nomenclature — Person not indivi-
dually concerned — Inadmissibility)

(2008/C 107/43)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Apple Computer International (Cork, Ireland) (repre-
sented by: G. Breen, Solicitor, P. Sreenan SC, and B. Quigley,
Barrister)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: X. Lewis and J. Hottiaux, Agents)

Re:

Re:

(Belgian Institute of Post

Application for annulment of the decision allegedly contained in
the letter of the Commission of 4 August 2006, addressed to
the Institut belge des services postaux et des telecommunica-
tions
and Telecommunications
Services) containing comments, pursuant to Article 7 of Direc-
tive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council
of 7 March 2002 on a common regulatory framework for elec-
tronic communications networks and services
(Framework
Directive) (OJ 2002 L 108, p. 33), concerning a draft decision
notified by that institute (Case BE/2006/0433).

Operative part of the order

The Court:

1. dismisses the action as inadmissible;

APPLICATION for annulment of Commission Regulation (EC)
No 2171/2005 of 23 December 2005 concerning the classifica-
tion of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature (OJ 2005
L 346, p. 7)

2. orders the applicant to pay its own costs and the costs of the

Commission;

3. orders Mobistar SA and the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay

their own costs.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

2. Apple Computer International shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 108, 6.5.2006.

(1) OJ C 310, 16.12.2006.

Order of the Court of First Instance of 22 February 2008
— Base v Commission

(Case T-295/06) (1)

(Action for annulment — Telecommunications — Article 7 of
Directive 2002/21/EC — Wholesale market for voice call
termination on individual mobile networks in Belgium —
Significant power on the market — Commission's comments
letter — Non-actionable measure — Lack of direct concern —
Inadmissibility)

(2008/C 107/44)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Action brought on 26 January 2008 — EREF v
Commission

(Case T-40/08)

(2008/C 107/45)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: European Renewable Energies Federation ASBL (EREF)
(Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: D. Fouquet, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

— The Decision C(2007) 4323 final of the European Commis-

sion of 25 September 2007 is declared null and void;

Applicant: Base NV (Brussels, Belgium)
Verheyden, Y. Desmedt and F. Bimont, lawyers)

(represented by: A.

— the financial vehicle in question in its present shape and

structure is declared unlawful state aid;