Case C-98/08: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil n o 7 de Madrid (Spain) lodged on 4 March 2008 — Asociación de Gestión de Derechos Intelectuales (AGEDI) and Asociación de Artistas Intérpretes o Ejecutantes — Sociedad de Gestión de España (AIE) v Sogecable S.A. and Canal Satélite Digital S.L.
Date: 2008-03-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: audiovisual industry, copyright, intellectual property, interpretation of the law, music

C 128/22

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

24.5.2008

First

Appeal brought on 3 March 2008 by Akzo Nobel NV,
Akzo Nobel Nederland BV, Akzo Nobel Chemicals
International BV, Akzo Nobel Chemicals BV, Akzo Nobel
Functional Chemicals BV against the judgment of the Court
of
delivered on
12 December 2007 in Case T-112/05: Akzo Nobel NV,
Akzo Nobel Nederland BV, Akzo Nobel Chemicals
International BV, Akzo Nobel Chemicals BV, Akzo Nobel
Functional Chemicals BV v Commission of the European
Communities

(Second Chamber)

Instance

(Case C-97/08 P)

(2008/C 128/38)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellants: Akzo Nobel NV, Akzo Nobel Nederland BV, Akzo
Nobel Chemicals International BV, Akzo Nobel Chemicals BV,
Akzo Nobel Functional Chemicals BV (represented by: Mr C.
Swaak, advocaat, Mr M. van der Woude, avocat, Ms M. Mollica,
avvocato)

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of
Communities

the European

Form of order sought

The appellants claim that the Court should rule:

— that

the judgment of

Instance of
12 December 2007 in Case T-112/05 be set aside, insofar as
it rejected the plea that responsibility was wrongfully attrib-
uted — jointly and severally — to Akzo Nobel NV;

the Court of First

— that the Contested Decision be annulled, in as far as it attrib-

uted responsibility to Akzo Nobel NV;

— that the Commission pay the costs of this appeal and of the
proceedings before the Court of First Instance in as far as
they concern the plea raised in the present appeal.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicants consider that the Court of First Instance has
misapplied the concept of ‘undertaking’ within the meaning of
Article 81 EC and Article 23(2) of Regulation 1/2003 (1), as
interpreted by the Court in its case-law on the imputation of
the unlawful conduct of a subsidiary to its parent company.

(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 L 1, p. 1).

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo
Mercantil no 7 de Madrid (Spain) lodged on 4 March 2008
— Asociación de Gestión de Derechos
Intelectuales
Intérpretes o
(AGEDI)
Ejecutantes — Sociedad de Gestión de España (AIE) v
Sogecable S.A. and Canal Satélite Digital S.L.

and Asociación de Artistas

(Case C-98/08)

(2008/C 128/39)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de lo Mercantil no 7 de Madrid

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Asociación de Gestión de Derechos Intelectuales
(AGEDI) and Asociación de Artistas Intérpretes o Ejecutantes —
Sociedad de Gestión de España (AIE)

Defendants: Sogecable S.A. and Canal Satélite Digital S.L.

Question referred

in particular, Council Directive
Does Community law and,
92/100/EEC (1) of 19 November 1992 on rental right and
lending right and on certain rights related to copyright in the
field of intellectual property permit the Member States to adopt
a provision like Article 109.1 of Law 22/1987 of 11 November
on Intellectual Property, which recognises the exclusive right of
producers of phonograms published for commercial purposes
to authorise the public communication of those phonograms
and copies thereof?

(1) OJ 1992 L 346, p. 61.

Action brought on 3 March 2008 — Commission of the
European Communities v Kingdom of Belgium

(Case C-100/08)

(2008/C 128/40)

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: S. Pardo Quintillan and R. Troosters, acting as
Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Belgium